BC/BD

To be clear, I was seeking a intervention and I was hoping, although in my experience I thought unlikely, that people might actually be able to see what was going on and beyond what was being selectively presented.

There weren't 3 people editing. There was just me and two other people making minor corrections or changes.

(The point that I had created this page was related to the absurdity of being the person who had added the content that I was being policed about editing by people who weren't making substantial changes themselves, and who had both indicated they had no subject matter expertise, but claimed their broad knowledge of creoles qualified them to make generalisations.)

After 3 sig edits, I came back after half a day to find a unsourced edit by someone who had previously said they had no subject knowledge. I didn't argue with him, I simply continued my edits from the night before. After my significant edit, he responded with a comment accusing me of 'steamrolling his edits' and ordering me to discuss things with him on the talk page.

There was no dispute and I don't need to seek permission to edit on Wikipedia, anymore than anyone else does. Particularly, to discuss a factual sourced change with a person who had made an unfactual unsourced change.

Also, how was I streamrolling his -53 character change with my two 2479 + 294 character changes? What was he talking about? And why should I bring a discussion to the talk page?

Also what dispute was he eluding to? He had made a comment on the talk page of another page days earlier and we'd had no discussion since. Was he referring to his change on the other article de-capitalising a word throughout? How did that transfer to this article, or rise to the level of a dispute, and how was I supposed to know he objected to me editing on either page?

But why should I clear my edits with him and another user who I had been having a running discussion with?

At the same time, the other user kept going on about trying to get me to move a discussion about a proposed name change to another forum when I told him I was happy to leave the discussion on the talk page. He even proposed making a requested move himself because I wouldn't.

Yes, I was sarky in that talk page discussion with the second user because he kept giving me unsolicited advice and kept coming back to a point - the naming of the language/language varieties - even after it had been discussed.

Except that the first user's edits did seem to be related to the second user's edits because they both seemed to be assuming that my changes were in aid of moving the second page rather than making the page an accurate reflection of what it was currently about.

I'm only explaining all of this to you because I've found you to be fair in the past. After being on this platform for 20+ years, I don't need to be told to go write on my own blog if I'm not happy with people making changes. I created that page in 2006 and I certainly haven't been policing it. But I've asked you before, in a situation like this, besides walking away, what exactly do you want me (realistically and reasonably) to do?

MmeMaigret (talk) 06:25, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 16

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on August 16. Please help translate.

---

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Let's Talk continues

• Wikimedia Futures Lab: Apply before Sep 4 to join The Wikimedia Futures Lab, the in-person convening hosted on January 30 – February 1, 2026 in Frankfurt, Germany with participants from affiliates, contributors and external experts, to learn more about global trends and discuss potential movement-wide responses.
• Wikimania 2026: The theme and date for Wikimania 2026 have been decided: Liberté, Équité, Fiabilité (Freedom, Equity, Reliability). This edition will take place in Paris, from July 21 to July 25, 2026.

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

• Tech News: Some of the latest updates from Tech News week 34 and 35: An A/B test comparing two versions of the desktop donate link launched on testwiki and English Wikipedia for 0.1% of logged out users on the desktop site. The experiment will run for three weeks, ending on 12 September; Administrators can now access the Special:BlockedExternalDomains page from the Special:CommunityConfiguration list page. This makes it easier to find.
• Spread Wikilove, thank comments: A new improvement was added to the "Discussion tools" Beta feature; it is now possible to thank a user for their comment. This new feature is released for a 3-months long test.
• Community Wishlist: Template authors can now use additional CSS properties, since the CSS sanitizer used by TemplateStyles was updated. These improvements are a Community Wishlist wish.
• Wikipedia Mobile Apps: The Android app team has launched a new experiment in Italy that lets logged-out readers of Italian and English Wikipedia set their own donation reminders based on how often they read. This new approach responds to feedback from donors who say their motivation to give is tied to their reading habits. Instead of one-size-fits-all banners, readers can now choose reminders that fit their own usage, all while keeping their privacy intact.

Annual Goals Progress on Volunteer Support
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog · WikiLearn News · list of movement events

• Wikipedia 25: To celebrate Wikipedia’s 25th birthday, the Wikimedia Foundation is adding several resources to the Wikipedia 25 Meta-Wiki hub.
• The Wikipedia Library: Collections from Dow Jones & Company, including the The Wall Street Journal, are now available to editors who are eligible for The Wikipedia Library.
• Don't Blink: The latest developments from around the world about protecting the Wikimedia model, its people and its values.

Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter

• Affiliate recognition: The recognition of new User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations is paused until March 31, 2026.
• Board of Trustees selection: The voting period for the upcoming Board selection process will now open on October 8 and close October 23.
• New Board member: Wikimedia Foundation welcomes incoming Board Trustee Mayree Clark.

Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library · Milestones · Wikidata · Central and Eastern Europe · other newsletters

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!

MediaWiki message delivery 18:13, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Sobia Masood

Draft:Sobia Masood was moved around to make things confusing and to avoid the AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sobia Masood. I've got it back to Sobia Masood and page move protected it until the AfD is done. CambridgeBayWeather (#1 deranged), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 07:06, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CambridgeBayWeather,

I have forgotten what my part in this article or page move or AFD was yesterdat but I appreciate your explanation. Thanks for visiting my User talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:30, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Category:Films scored by Rajesh Ramanath

I see you have deleted this. Rajesh Ramanath is the article title. Move Category:Films scored by Rajesh Ramnath to the correct title. DareshMohan (talk) 02:31, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, DareshMohan,

Category:Films scored by Rajesh Ramanath was deleted in 2022 because it was an empty category (CSD C1). Empty categories can always be restored if there is a need for them in the future. If there are suitable articles, feel free to recreate this page or make a request here or at WP:REFUND. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:56, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

hello Liz, please you moved my articles for deletion, I have more verified publications to reference them now.

Good day Liz, trust you are doing very well today, please I wrote an article on the subjects Blue Seal Energy group and Doyle Edeni, you moved them for deletion because the articles weren't having enough verified reference, how can I get the articles back on wikipedia since there are more verifiable references now? Stephen Ini (talk) 06:10, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen Ini,

I can't look into this until you provide me with links to the articles or to the deleted articles. I look at hundreds of pages every day and I don't have time to search for what ones you might be talking about when you can easily provide me with links to these pages so I can see why the pages were deleted. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:23, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Blue Seal Energy Group and Doyle Redotelojor Edeni Stephen Ini (talk) 06:52, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen Ini,

Thanks very much, that's what I needed to see. Both articles were deleted through WP:AFD discussion among the community. These articles can not be easily restored. This is not true for all forms of deletion but it is true for AFDs. The only way I know to overcome a Deletion closure in an AFD is for there to be a new draft version of the article, which avoids the problems that caused the article to be deleted. And once it's created, submit it to WP:AFC for review and, hopefully, approval. You might review the AFD discussions for these articles which are linked to the deletion notice at the top of the page for Blue Seal Energy Group and Doyle Redotelojor Edeni. If you have any questions after reviewing the deletion discussions, let me know. Alternatively, you can always go to the Teahouse which is a friendly forum for new editors to go and ask questions of experienced editors who can offer you advice, support and a second opinion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:10, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

thank you so much Liz, I appreciate your response. Stephen Ini (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Requests for undeletion

Hi @Liz! I'd like to request for Israfil Bek Jedigar to be restored. I have given reasons why separately here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_410#Israfil Bek Jedigar. Thanks in advance! Yousiphh (talk) 08:06, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@Liz Please do not ignore my request. Yousiphh (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

@Liz Hello. Yousiphh (talk) 22:10, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

List of Church of England instruments

Hello there, I'm not sure you want yet another entry on this subject. But it now turns out that Landpin was a sock puppet and not necessarily the best example of "acting in good faith". This was a useful List which went through AfD, objections were raised, and it is now difficult to recreate as a new item, there were hundreds of entries. Any suggestions? ChrysGalley (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Church of England instruments

ChrysGalley (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Revdel

Can you check this revision on Dookie (disambiguation)? Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Also this one Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 05:16, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

These edits are decades old. I guess they can be removed but the way you are presenting the diffs makes it difficult to take action. I have to go back years in the page history and try to find them. If you could just provide a link to the diff, that would be more useful. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:23, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Deletion of Asthma & Allergy Network Page

Hello Liz, This inquiry is about a page you removed of a non-profit that I work with. There was no single intention of the wiki page but to educate people through medically reviewed material on many conditions involving asthma, allergies, or related conditions, and share resources. We are expanding in advocacy and our Trusted Messenger program is vital to many in underserved communities. Additionally, our research work includes many DOI links of papers we've authored or co-authored. Will you consider restoring this page? Our name has changed to Allergy & Asthma Network and I came her to change that noticed the page was gone. Thank you kindly.

~~~~ Kshallcross (talk) 14:41, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2025).

Administrator changes

Euryalus

• Admrboltz
• FloNight
• Floquenbeam
• Ganeshk
• JesseW
• Night Gyr
• Nixdorf

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

CheckUser changes

AmandaNP

SQL

Oversight changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open on whether use of emojis with no encyclopedic value in mainspace and draftspace (e.g., at the start of paragraphs or in place of bullet points) should be added as a criterion under G15.

Technical news

• Administrators can now access the Special:BlockedExternalDomains page from the Special:CommunityConfiguration list page. This makes it easier to find. T393240

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Article titles and capitalisation 2 has been closed.
• An RfC is in progress to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Grubisz440 - WP:CIR regarding English grammar and spelling

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1189#Poor_English_from_User:Grubisz440, from June 9, 2025.

Grubisz440 has contributed a lot to Mao Mao: Heroes of Pure Heart; however, most, if not all, of their edits have introduced grammar and spelling errors to the point where these issues have become systemic to the page. Notice the sloppy work:

• "Alongwith his personal experiences with family and friends, like the inspirations of Mao Mao's family and his nine siblings was loosely based of the real life with Parker's family where he was the youngest of all of them. But the one that became more revelant was himself as series development continued."
• "Tommy Blacha, Chris McCulloch or Debra Wilson, who previously voiced characters in shows that Parker was involed on prior to the show, they also voiced characters in Mao Mao as well. The inspirations and influence of the series that Parker took was a media that he grown up with like Batman: the animtaed series, Akira Toriyama's manga and animated series like Dragon Ball and Dr. Slump, as well Super Nintendo roleplay videogame, Chrono Trigger.."
• "As of result, many shots, backgrounds and action-related elements were considered to be polished or cut. As well, many retakes of episodes were made by various staff artist, to improve quality of the animation and shots. Which was doable thanks to openess of Adobe Animate. Per episode, over 50 of them were made by Parker himself."
• "It was received positively from critics, getting prase for narrative, stroytelling, action and character dynamics. It got 5 nominations and one of which been won, one of the last outstanding Performer in an Animated Program by Paker Simmons for his voice acting performance."
• "Following a postive feedback from the audience and intrest from Chris Prynoski, a 7-minute pilot titled I Love You Mao Mao: BAO BAO's Revenge started it's development for the following pitch from the Cartoon Network in 2017. It was greenlited for the 95-week deadline for the television release schedule. Making in time, where it was annouced for a full series alongside Tig n' Seek in May 20, 2019."

I have raised the issue on the article's talk page; however, Grubisz440 has continued to edit the page, and has shown next to no improvement to their grasp of English grammar and spelling. As I had stated back at ANI, I have major concerns about the editor's competency, and so far they've done nothing to alleviate those concerns.

Pinging Phil Bridger as an editor who was also involved in the initial ANI discussion. The Grand Delusion^{(Send a message)} 21:50, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

page moving

Hello Miss Liz At first I wanted to move the article Sureshjan, Isfahan to (Soroushjan) but also there is another article named Sureshjan that I wrongly moved it instead and now the system doesn't move.Could you please move? Thanks.Jumberidze (talk) 04:46, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Jumberidze,

I don't know what you were trying to do but it caused a mess. Sometimes new editors work on an article when an older article with the same page title already exists and they do crazy things to get the older article deleted off of Wikipedia so their new article can be at that specific page title. These chaotic moves can end up with the editor blocked because it is very disruptive editing.

There are several different solutions that can be made when more than one article has the same page title. In this situation, tell me exactly what you want to happen but it is still unclear to me. Tell me the names of both articles and where you want them to be moved. It might be that they are renamed to an alternate page title but that can happen after I understand what pages you are focused on. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:30, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Pronunciation of title of article Sureshjan, Isfahan is wrong and related to another article.The correct pronunciation is (Soroushjan) and I wanted to move.Could you please move Sureshjan, Isfahan to (Soroushjan)?Jumberidze (talk) 08:17, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

User talk:ClemRutter

Hi Liz, I hope you're well and having a good weekend. I'm just checking the reason you've deleted the above page as WP:G13, Abandoned draft or AfC submission? The page in question isn't an abandoned draft, it's the user talk page of a formerly prolific user who's been blocked for a few years. Was this done in error? I'm not seeing a pressing reason to delete this page, and I don't think it is usual to do so. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Was also coming to leave a heads up -- looks like you just deleted a bunch of user talk pages. Something somewhere has gone wrong. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:38, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

All the recent ones deletions here were done in error; I tried to restore User talk:Haoreima ( 1,284 revisions) but got a data base error doing so. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:41, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm cleaning this up right now and using partial undeletions for the larger pages. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:45, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Me, Asilvering, HouseBlaster, and ComplexRational have cleaned this all up now; please be careful in the future. I think you know that, though. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:29, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

I came here for the same reason re User talk:John Broughton. BD2412 T 16:55, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm so sorry, Amakuru, Moneytrees🏝️, and BD2412. I screwed up massively this morning. I was half-asleep, grabbed my phone and mixed up User:DreamRimmer bot II/Reports/G13 eligible drafts page with Wikipedia:Database reports/Unusually large user talk pages and then went back to sleep. When I woke up two hours later, I had the feeling that I did something wrong, because G13 eligible drafts lists Drafts and the page where I did a batch delete was a list of User talk pages but I found all of the deleted pages had already been reverted. Many, many thanks to asilvering, HouseBlaster ComplexRational and every other admin who helped restore the pages I mistakenly deleted. I should never edit until I'm fully awake.

Besides giving a big apology for the confusion, I will say that I've been an admin for 10 years and this kind of mixup has only happened to me one other time, about 4 years ago, also with a batch deletion. I promise never to edit when I'm half-asleep again, especially no page deletions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

No apologies needed, these things happen. Cheers! BD2412 T 22:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Please archive your talk page, though. It's taking forever to close. BD2412 T 22:51, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

No worries – we all have days like that. ^Complex/_Rational 02:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Liz, and thanks to those who sorted the issue.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:25, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

User talk pages deleted under G13

Hi Liz, I noticed that you recently deleted a bunch of user talk page under G13: I suspect a faulty <noinclude> or <includeonly> tag caused these pages to populate CAT:G13, whereas the only pages that should have been deleted were abandoned drafts authored by these users. I've already reversed one of these deletions; there are about 40 to go. And just be vigilant to make sure this doesn't happen again. Thanks, ^Complex/_Rational 16:46, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I hadn't seen the section immediately above when writing my comment. Feel free to combine the two. ^Complex/_Rational 16:49, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

AfD closure

Hi, I wasn’t pinged in this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palestinian cause (2nd nomination) إيان (talk) 23:07, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

== Deletion review for Palestinian cause ==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Palestinian cause. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. إيان (talk) 18:34, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Does this merit action?

@Liz:: Does this "attack" post (which has been reverted) merit any action/warning to the editor who posted? While the post is signed by User:Danram Qurocan (a blocked user), it was actually posted by User:MickeyPT. — ERcheck (talk) 02:12, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just a heads-up: I have an SPI open on this one, and they're reported at AIV. tony 02:15, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@TonySt - Thanks! — ERcheck (talk) 02:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Mark Guiducci draft

Hi Liz, I just noticed that there was a draft for Mark Guiducci created by User:Theeenewyorker back in 2021. Can you restore it to Draft:Mark Guiducci 2 or whatever page name seems appropriate so I can see if there is any material I can use to improve the main space article? Thank you, Thriley (talk) 17:21, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Your take on User:Niranjan Adostrophe's userpage/user account

@Liz: The userpage for Niranjan Adostrophe is from Wikimedia. It does not seem to comply with English Wikipedia guidelines. On that page, it says the account represents a group (thus, an issue with user account). In addition, the page lists a number of English Wikipedia articles that do not exist.

How does this get handled on English Wikipedia? — ERcheck (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 September 2025

142.126.247.147 - pls block this IP editor

Hi Liz, good day. Sorry to bother you again, as there is always a lack of active admins during the night time in US to action AIV requests. Please block the IP address User:142.126.247.147, and please see their contribution log here, as they are actively vandalizing Wikipedia pages close to 30 edits. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 05:15, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Update: The matter has been taken care by Ymblanter. IP account is blocked. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 05:52, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Request about the soft deletion of Naqshbandi Golden Chain

Hello! :) I was trying to find this extraordinary summary i saw a while ago and saw that it got soft-deleted. My request didn't work and i was told to contact the administrator. I hope i'm in the right place! The page was such a well educated, well arranged and informative summary one couldn't find annnnywhere else. I wanted to kindly request the restoration of the page named "Nakshbandi Golden Chain" and "Silsilah". Thank you so much. All the best :) Roserosaaa (talk) 17:32, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Roserosaaa,

We ask that editors inquiring about pages provide a link to the page they are talking about. For example, there is no page, deleted or existing, at Nakshbandi Golden Chain and while there is a page at Silsilah, that page is a redirect that has existed for over a decade so it doesn't sound like the page you are talking about. If you can locate these deleted pages and provide a link to them, then I can investigate why they were deleted and whether or not anything can be done about it. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:19, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your response! I didn't find a specific link but found this written in the footer of a page:

Copied and paste here:

"Revision as of 05:43, 8 May 2022

3 YEARS AGO

..........

Removing link(s) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naqshbandi Golden Chain closed as soft delete (XFDcloser)

=See also==

[[Silsilal]

[Naqshbandi Golden Chain]"

It must be "Silsila" and "Naqshbandi Golden Chain". The way i spelled it wasn't correct. Please accept my apologies. Good night! Roserosaaa (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

AfD summaries

Hi! I referenced your comment in an AfD discussion about how editors should not attempt to give summaries of an ongoing AfD. Is there a particular policy/guideline to reference in a case such as this (is it something like a WP:SUPERVOTE?), or just common sense that editors shouldn't take it upon themselves to interpret all other editors' comments and add more words to an already large word count? This has happened in 2 of the past 3 AfDs I've commented on, but I don't know what specifically to reference. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM,

I'm not sure if this advice is written into policy or just reflects our current practice. I started being involved in closing AFD discussions in 2020 and this advice was part of the AFD culture I kind of "inherited". I'll look over WP:AFD and associated policy pages and see if appears anywhere. I'll just say that the existence of unwritten "rules" is not unique to AFD, it's common in other areas or project as well. Sometimes they are advice given in commonly accepted essays that doesn't have the same level of authority as actual policy and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:13, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Lviv rabbis

Liz, I get that the !votes for delete were overwhelming on List of Lviv rabbis, but they weren't policy-based. I pointed to a source that considered them as a group and I just posted another one in an edit conflict as it was being closed. Jahaza (talk) 22:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

A third source considering them as a group/list is the List of Rabbis of Lviv in the Jewish Encyclopedia. Jahaza (talk) 22:57, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Well, Jahaza, I thought there was a solid consensus among editors to Delete this article but if you disagree, you can bring this AFD closure to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Or, alternatively, since I believe you were asking for a Redirect, you can always create a redirect from this deleted page title. If you think you'd like to work on this article yourself, we can restore it to Draft space but you can't just move it back to main space without passing it through an AFC review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:58, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Re Talk:Edit

Could you please be more careful and not stomp on what I was doing. I was trying to do a WP:Selective deletion to clean up hundreds of vandalism and accidental edits from the history, and you just ruined what I did. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, * Pppery *,

I don't think I was being "careless". I saw a page deleted, for no stated reason, that resulted in several broken redirects. If there were special circumstances for this page deletion that didn't fit into one of our CSD criteria, then please leave a comprehensive reason explaining what you are doing. I thought your page deletion was being careless. I don't know exactly where you could post this explanation but perhaps a longer deletion rationale. If the page had been deleted citing a valid CSD criteria that applied, I wouldn't have reverted your action. If I am partially at fault, it's because I probably should have asked you about this deletion on your User talk page before restoring this deleted page, that's on me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:54, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Companies based in Lake Arrowhead, California

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Banaticus's talk page.
Message added 00:38, 12 September 2025 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deleted redirects

Please see this user talk page post. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:30, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Jonesey95,

Thanks for alerting me to this message. Without your meesage here, I never would have come acros it. However, this looks like a complicated situation with previous AFDs and undiscussed page moves so I'll need to spend some time thinking this one through. It looks like there was some improper editing activity going on. I'll give it more time tomorrow morning. Thanks again for the alert. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:26, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Deletion of User talk:Tarch Artificial Intelligence/sandbox

Doesn't G8 not apply when it's a user talk page? or is it because it's the sandbox subpage? BodhiHarp 05:04, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, User:BodhiHarp,

There are instances when User talk pages (and other types of talk pages) are tagged as G8-exempt but I don't know of a rule that user talk pages protects from all types of deletion. In this instance, it was the talk page for User:Tarch Artificial Intelligence/sandbox which was deleted as a stale draft, CSD G13. I use Twinkle to handle all of the deletions I do and Twinkle generally deletes talk pages and redirects any time you delete regular articles, drafts, categories, templates, etc.

Since the editor here is indefinitely blocked, so what brought this user talk page to your attention? Because it was part of a CSD G13 deletion, I can restore it if there is content on it that you wish to preserve. If you want it to be a rule that User talk pages are never ever deleted, I think you should make a proposalt at WT:CSD or the Village Pump because it's not just MY behavior that would need to change but all admins or page movers who have the capacity to delete a page or in the page mover's case, the ability to not leave a redirect. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:21, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

I found you deleting it through "recent changes". BodhiHarp 15:12, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

and by the way, doesn't this speedy deletion criterion only apply to drafts and not user subpages? BodhiHarp 20:19, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Talk pages of user subpages are not really "user talk pages". jlwoodwa (talk) 08:53, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Administrator Elections | RFC phase

Administrator Elections | RFC phase

The RFC phase of the July 2025 administrator elections has started. There are 10 RFCs for consideration. You can participate in the RFC phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/RFCs.

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

TPA Revoke: 216.209.188.104

Hi :)

Could you revoke the talk page access of 216.209.188.104.

It's a cesspool over there.

Thx, ✦GLORPK4✦  | 📡 03:19, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Isabelle Belato already just did it.

Thx ✦GLORPK4✦  | 📡 03:24, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, GlorpK4,

It looks like User:Isabelle Belato got to this request before I could. But TPA has been removed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:26, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Cite Unseen September 2025 updates

Tony Pham (footballer)

@Liz:, Would you be able to draftify Tony Pham (footballer)? I never realized that it was proposed for deletion until today when it exprired. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 10:28, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)  Done jlwoodwa (talk) 21:39, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Request revision deletions for DYDW (Cebu City)

Hello, @Liz! I have request revision deletions for DYDW (Cebu City) that redirect a draft's merger starting from 12:22, 19 March 2025 CryingSulfur up to 11:00, 7 September 2025 JJMC89 bot because the draft Draft:DYDW (Cebu) has been delete. However, this new article has since been created at 11:35, 7 September 2025 WikiRadioPH2025 and has reviewed the article DYDW (Cebu City). Thank you and advance! WikiRadioPH2025 (talk) 12:31, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 17

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on August 29. Please help translate.

---

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Let's Talk continues

• Wikimania 2026: The scholarship application for Wikimania 2026 is open. Apply now by October 31.
• Wikipedia 25: Help us find inspiring stories to share during birthday celebrations by September 23.
• Wikimedia Research Showcase: "Readers and Readership Research" will be the featured theme for the next research showcase taking place on September 24 at 16:30 UTC.
• Update to banner and logo policies: Feedback is requested on proposed policy and documentation updates regarding the use of banners and logos for advocacy purposes.
• GLAM Wiki 2025: The registration for GLAM Wiki Conference is open until September 30.

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Product Safety and Integrity · Readers · Research · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

• Better bot detection: How we are improving bot detection and replacing our CAPTCHA.
• Temporary Accounts: Temporary accounts are now deployed to almost all wikis except the last 11.
• User Info: This new feature displays data related to a user account when you tap or click on the "user avatar" icon button next to a username. It's meant to be useful for different users with extended rights as well as newcomers.
• Newsletter highlights: The latest Readers Newsletter is now available. It includes considerations about Wikipedia's declining pageviews in the recent years, how the Foundation and communities may work on addressing this together, and the formation of two new teams — Reader Growth and Reader Experience.
• Activity Tab Experiment: The Foundation launched an experiment testing a new Activity tab in the Wikipedia Android app to our beta testers. Instead of only showing editing activity, this tab also surfaces insights about reading and donation behavior.
• Search Suggestions: To make it easier for users to find articles, logged-out users on both desktop and mobile will see suggestions of articles for further reading on English Wikipedia beginning the week of September 22. All non-English wikis received this update in June and July.
• Paste Check: The Foundation is working on a new check: Paste check. This check informs newcomers who paste text into Wikipedia that the content might not be accepted to ensure it is aligned with the Movement's values. This check will soon be tested at a few wikis.
• CampaignEvents extension: The CampaignEvents extension has been enabled for all Wikisources. The extension makes it easier to organize and participate in collaborative activities, like edit-a-thons and WikiProjects, on the wikis. To request the extension for your wiki, visit the information page.
• Structured Task: The Add a Link Structured Task has been fully released at English Wikipedia. This release is an important step in making editing more accessible for new contributors, especially on mobile.
• Tech News: Read more updates from Tech News week 36 and 37.
• Wikifunctions: Wikifunctions is now available on 65 Wiktionaries and has a new capability to copy function calls from one Wikipedia to another.
• Multilingual Contributors: The Language and Product Localisation team is launching a CentralNotice campaign to attract multilingual contributors to specific Wikipedias. The campaign will feature regionally targeted banners to reach potential native speakers.

Annual Goals Progress on Volunteer Support
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog · WikiLearn News · list of movement events

• Global Resources: Introducing the interim Global Resource Distribution Committee (GRDC).
• Funding the Movement: Key Takeaways, Trends, and Lessons from FY 2024-2025 Community Fund Grants.
• Open Indonesia: Reflections on Open Indonesia, an event in Bandung gathering communities dedicated to advancing open knowledge to build the country's Open Knowledge Roadmap.
• WikiWomen*: Reflections from the WikiWomen* Summit 2025.
• Gender & AI: Is Gendering AI Possible? Reflections from the 2025 Gendering AI Conference.
• Wikipedia 25: What one centenarian can teach us about 25 years of Wikipedia.
• Knowledge Equity Fund: Wikimedia Ghana User Group receives Knowledge Equity Fund Connected Grant.
• Wikimania 2025: ESEAP First Timers at Wikimania Nairobi.
• César do Paço Lawsuit: Update about a lawsuit in Portugal and the Foundation's appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
• UK Online Safety Act: The Wikimedia Foundation will not appeal the UK High Court’s decision to dismiss our challenge to the UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA) Categorisation Regulations.

Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter

• August board meeting: Updates on board appointments and selection, CEO search, work to strengthen Wikipedia's approach to neutral point of view and updates on three pilots around more shared decision-making and shared accountability across the movement.
• New Endowment board members: Welcoming New Wikimedia Endowment Board Members, Kevin Bonebrake and Ike Kier.

Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library · Milestones · Wikidata · Central and Eastern Europe · other newsletters

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!

MediaWiki message delivery 01:04, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Anyone on your radar?

Hi Liz! Impressed that you can keep up your admin works despite being on Arbcom. That seems like an impossible feat. Just wondering if you've come across any editors who might lighten your load if they were to request adminship. I'm always on the lookout for editors to vet and encourage to run. If you do, do let me know, either on Wikipedia or via mail! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:30, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, [User:Femke|—Femke 🐦]],

Well, as a matter of fact, I was just talking about this with DreamRimmer who is my technical guru. His tools have saved admins a great deal of time. I was unaware of this when I suggested this move the other day but he's already been through an RFA that I haven't looked at sbut I think the obstacle was not an impressive range of content creation. This was a factor with my own RFA but I managed to squeak through any way. So, I suggested he try the admin elections but I'm not sure he wants to go through this experience again. They'd make a great admin though.

As for my own workload, well, I'm always behind on my talk page replies as this user page gets a lot of traffic. The routine duties are fairly easy to keep up with but the personal replies are more demanding. But thanks for the compliment! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:37, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Rain (fintech) AfD

Hi @Liz! First, thank you for your work! Second, so sorry, I am pretty new here, I did not know about adding strikethrough on my older votes. Appreciate the patience and tip. Third, I would love to keep working on the article in the draft space. If you could help me with that, I would appreciate it! Cheers! Veggiegalaxy (talk) 22:59, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Veggiegalaxy,

Can you provide me with a link to the deleted article so I can look into this? Much appreciated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:32, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Liz!

Here's the deletion discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rain_(fintech)

Here's the deleted page! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rain_(fintech)&action=edit&redlink=1

Please let me know if you need anything else and thank you!

Cheers, Veggiegalaxy (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Liz! Any chance I can still work on this in the draftspace? Cheers, Veggiegalaxy (talk) 16:34, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Martin Zeileis

Due to personal circumstances, I was not able to finish the draft page on Martin Zeileis. Draft:Martin Zeileis. Unfortunately, the page was deleted. Is it possible to recover that page so that I can continue to work on it? Dragon Genoa (talk) 10:07, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

The article was published, Martin Zeileis. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:59, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Dragon Genoa,

Yes, Draft:Martin Zeileis was just a redirect to a main space article so there is no use restoring that page. Martin Zeileis was deleted as a Proposed deletion which can be restored upon request. Would you like that to happen, Dragon Genoa? Thanks for the assist, Kaffet i halsen! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes please, can you recover the page for me so I can continue to improve the work. Dragon Genoa (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Dragon Genoa,

 Done. Please be aware that Kaffet i halsen tagged it for a Proposed deletion and could tag it for an AFD discussion now that it has been restored. You might want to have a word with them. We could also move it to Draft space or to your User space if you think your work on it will take a while. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:44, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks both for your help. I will contact Kaffet i halsen next week for advice Thanks, Thanks, Thanks. Dragon Genoa (talk) 15:44, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 70

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 70, July–August 2025

• New collections:
  • Times of Malta
  • Africa Intelligence
  • Intelligence Online
  • La Lettre
  • Glitz
• Spotlight: Wikimania

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team – 13:15, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

(This message was sent to User:Liz and is being posted here due to a redirect.)

hey!

how can i get my username like yours? shane (talk) 15:08, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, shane,

To change your username, go to Wikipedia:Changing username. It's pretty straight-forward. In my own case, "Liz" had already been registered years ago but the editor had not made any edits with the account so I got it reassigned to me through a process called "Usupation" where a steward simply reassigned the username to me. Just go to the policy page for username changes and read over the section on "Usurpation requests". Since Wikipedia has been around for 24 years, it can be difficult to find a username that hasn't already been taken but there are quite a lot of usernames that are registered but never used and in those cases, usurpation can switch over the registration. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) I wonder if they were referring to the styling. Esolo5002 (talk) 00:12, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

and you would be correct shane (talk) 00:17, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding. Well, if you go into the "Edit" features of any of my responses you can find information on fonts and those details. I'm not sure how to change a signature if you use the mobile app but I use a laptop and you just go to the top of the page and click on "Preferences" or go to Special:Preferences. There, on the very first page is a place to paste in your preference for how a signature appears. I'd recommend looking at a lot of different editors' signatures to make sure you get the design you prefer and then customize it. Many editors "borrow" font settings from other editors. One trend you'll see is that very new editors tend to have overly fancy signatures while long-time editors usually have very simple signatures. The most important factor is that you have to be able to easily read a signature, it must contain at least one link to your User talk page and it can't contain images in it. There are a lot of pages on the project that have sample signatures, if you go to the the Teahouse they can point you in the right direction. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:33, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors – September 2025 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed GoldRomean to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as lead coordinator, and Miniapolis and Mox Eden return as coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here. June 2025 blitz: 10 of the 12 editors who signed up for the June 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 26,652 words comprising 13 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. July 2025 drive: 30 of the 54 editors who signed up for the July 2025 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited a total of 379,557 words comprising 151 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. August 2025 Blitz: 11 of the 17 editors who signed up for the August 2025 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited a total of 65,601 words comprising 25 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. September 2025 Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive. Progress report: As of 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 222 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,010 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Knights of Guinevere Talk Page

Hi. Firstly, thank you very much for helping to restore the Knights of Guinevere article after all of that vandalism. However, it seems that, between all the vandal page moves & the attempts to revert those page moves & deletion of all the redirects, that the article's talk page (and along with it the talk page history) was lost somewhere in the shuffle. Fortunately, the talk page didn't have any discussions on it (it only had some unrated project banners & 2 ref ideas that had already been removed from the talk page due to being incorporated into the article). Nonetheless, if it would be possible to restore the talk page with its edit history, rather than just remaking the page, then that would be greatly appreciated. — Jamie Eilat (talk) 04:05, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Jamie Eilat,

Thanks for getting back to me. I think I restored the correct one. This page was moved around dozens of times so if this isn't the right one, I'll try and look for the original. Thanks again for all of your help. I've move protected the article for one month. But let one of us know if this vandal returns. They really were an expert on causing confusion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:11, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

The talk page is still missing the bulk of its original history, it seems. After looking through & following the move logs, I believe that the original talk page may have ended up being moved to one of these four locations before the vandal redirects were all deleted:

• Talk:Knights Of Disney Making money (30 deleted edits but all edits by vandal)
• Talk:Still disrupting this article (2 deleted edits by one by you, one by vandal)
• Talk:Dana Terrace is bad (same)
• Talk:Good luck cleaning this up (one edit by you)

I'm not precisely sure of which among the four it is, though. — Jamie Eilat (talk) 04:20, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Jamie Eilat,

This was really easy for me to check, just by looking at the deleted edit history. I assume the original's first edit would be by a regular editor. I put the results next to the page in the list you presented. I think the original might actually be Talk:Knights Of Guinevere as its first edit was in January 2025. And also Talk:Knights of Guinevere was started by you with an edit in January 2025. I think you can pick which one of these you want as the regular Talk page and which one you want as a Redirect. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:32, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

The issue is that the edit history for the talk page, if it were the original, should also have edits from me & User:Historyday01 adding & removing ref ideas during that past 2-ish days, but that isn't present. (And as for Talk:Knights Of Guinevere (with the capitalized O), that actually comes from a separate version of the article that was created while the current article page was still being developed as a draft, which was subsequently redirected to & merged with the draft; i.e., unrelated to all the vandalism that just happened.) — Jamie Eilat (talk) 04:46, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps checking through my and/or Historyday01's deleted contributions would help with finding where the talk page history ended up? — Jamie Eilat (talk) 04:59, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

That's a good idea, Jamie Eilat, do you have a rough idea when you and Historyday01 wrote down those notes? Just a month and year would help. That would cut down the time of investigating this. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:03, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Should be around September 19–20 (the past 2 days). If you see any deleted revisions from me around that time with the words "ref idea" in the edit summary, then whatever deleted page that edit is to must be the original talk page. — Jamie Eilat (talk) 05:06, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Can you look at the page history of User:Jamie Eilat/Knights and tell me what you think, Jamie Eilat? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:09, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

That's it! That's the original talk page! Now all that's left is to move back to Talk:Knights of Guinevere — Jamie Eilat (talk) 05:11, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I think everything you could need is in the Talk page's history, including the latest edits you made, adding banners. They should all be accessible to you now. Boy, I hope this vandal doesn't make this a regular habit. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:27, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this. I didn't revise much on the talk page myself, as shown here, apart from moving over one ref to the main page (that's mainly what I've been working on). Perhaps with the vandalism, the page should be protected. Historyday01 (talk) 12:43, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Greetings

Hi Liz,

Thank you for removing the adminstats widget from my user page. For some reason, I thought it will keep a summary of my contributions and other tasks. I did not realise it was exclusive to admins.

There's so much on Wikipedia. So much to read, so much to do. Amid this internal tug of war between following guidelines _{(I try my best to read all relevant sections dligently - takes me hours)} and being WP:BOLD _{(still struggling with this)} , I find myself getting overwhelmed and committing mistakes.

I am really eager to be a part of the Anti-vandalism initiative on WP. I am working with Twinkle as well. But I will try to be more judicious with my actions.

Thanks again for your help! Kingsacrificer (talk) 07:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Kingsacrificer,

Well, if you look at my User page, you can see my adminstats table and is for statistic for admin work like deleted pages, pages protected, editors blocked, pages restored. Ordinarily editors haven't done any of these activities so it would basically be an empty table. If you find yourself getting overwhelmed, log out and step back from working on the project. I've taken two lengthy WikiBreaks, one for 6 months and later, after I became an admin, I took a 2 year break. I wouldn't be editing now, 13 years later, if I hadn't taken those breaks as long as little ones. You don't have to know EVERYTHING all at once as a new editor. It's important to realize that even us longtimers get criticism on our User talk pages about steps we overlooked or mistakes we made. It's impossible to be perfect and free from all criticism so don't set that as an expectation for yourself or any other editor.

Second, my first year as an editor, I visited the Teahouse A LOT. I'd be really angry and frustrated because I had gotten reverted or couldn't get something easily accomplished that I thought should be no big deal and I'd go to the Teahouse and vent. At least the regular hosts back then (circa 2013) were very understanding and tried to get me to be aware of why rules and guidelines were the way they were. They helped preserve my sanity. So, I owe them a lot. Cultivate friendships and mentors. This place can seem harsh some days and it's nice to have a few people out there who want the best for you. They might be very busy and not available for chatting but they are out there. It can help to join a WikiProject if there is a certain subject you are interested in. See, there are many places to go to for help if you find yourself up against a brick wall. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:26, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Redirects deleted alongside "Transgender issue"

Rregarding this AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transgender issue: Please undelete preexisting redirects Transgender issues, Trans issues, and Trans-gender issues, which had the original target Transgender rights movement, and I retargeted them to the singular-titled dab. They had existed for a few years. —Alalch E. 07:29, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

And I must say that I don't agree with your close, as the issue here was whether the page is a valid disambiguation page, and at least two delete comments failed to address that, showing no awareness or understanding of disambiguation. And on a numerical side, it was pretty evenly matched. —Alalch E. 07:38, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Alalch E.,

As an AFD closer, I don't expect every editor to agree with my closures. In this case, it seemed like editors were interested in turning this page into something else. So, I was trying to encourage them to just create that page, the one they were trying to turn Transgender issues into, rather than coming up with more and more complicated arguments about why this page should resemble the page they wanted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:22, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

I understand, and I appreciate your time. I am of course highly biased here being someone who turned the redirect into the now-deleted dab, but I still feel like you might be interested in this honest feedback about options that were better than a straight "delete":

• One good ATD was "redirect" targeting The Transgender Issue, per Trystan.
• Another good ATD was "redirect" targeting Transgender rights movement, which was the form of the page as it had existed before conversion to a dab, and that redirect was appropriate and was consistent with the preexisting redirects Transgender issues, Trans issues, and Trans-gender issues. (I only turned the redirect into a dab because I considered the dab a little better.)
• Anoter option was "no consensus". The true deletion question was whether the dab page is a valid dab under Wikipedia:Disambiguation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages. Based on the divided opinions about the validity of the dab, and the generally low level of worry in keeping a dab, that was certainly an option.
• Another option building on "no consensus" was "no consensus to to delete + consensus to move" to the plural title. Namely, what you said in the close, a page "Move" is not a valid outcome to an AFD discussion, unfortunately, isn't correct. Moving is a valid outcome to an AfD discussion. And well attested: Please see "keep and move" AfDs, there's hundreds of them. Here's a brief discussion that touches on AfD an moving at Wikipedia talk:Deletion process. Basically, AfDs have many times decided on title when naming was brought up as a concern in relation to the page being suitable or not.
• Finally, it would have been reasonable to relist this discussion.

In your close you found a consensus to delete, but I honestly, after trying to peer through my bias, cannot see a "rough consensus" to delete versus apply an identified ATD. However, I have decided not to request any kind of change to your close or the outcome. The first option in the list above can be implemented at any time, and for me it's a good enough of an option. Therefore, I will now simply create the redirect targeting "The Transgender Issue" and add the hatnote Trystan suggested.

However, the three plural-form redirects that had previously existed and which had targeted Transgender rights movement should IMO be undeleted and restored to their original form; so would you please undelete those redirects? —Alalch E. 17:26, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Just marking this as resolved. Everything is fine now. —Alalch E. 17:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

My apologies...

Dear Liz,
Please accept my apologies for causing you unnecessary work, per the two messages you left at my talk page: here, and here. I created these categories during my "Wikiyouth" while creating equivalent userboxes in readiness to be selected by any Wikipedian who played these musical instruments; I hadn't realised at the time that one shouldn't create categories that are likely to remain unused. I therefore hope to be forgiven...
Please keep well and thank you for all your contributions to our encyclopaedia.
With kindest regards;
Patrick. ツ Pdebee.^{(talk)(become old-fashioned!)} 16:05, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Distracted with offline Work...

Thank you for Userfying "Obioma Success Akagburuonye". I completely understand that it worries you a bit that you didn't see a proposal for this from me, the article creator. I will begin afresh and create the page with more reliable sources some weeks from now as I am distracted by offline duties. Hope you understand, Liz.Royalrumblebee (talk) 09:31, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Black Atlantic

The article Black Atlantic has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability tag up for 21 months.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jw93d59 (talk) 12:46, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Matt relisting

Hi Liz, I was wondering what you meant here by "two different target articles." I proposed one but I didn't see another. Did I miss something? Coretheapple (talk) 22:34, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Question

How is this asserted to be useful and why did you mark it as G8 exempt? I am failing to see the reasoning behind this given it is blank (with no comments in the history), is not an archive, not a review, not a FAQ or anything that could actually be helpful? Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 02:42, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Talk:Cadet College Swat

Talk:Cadet College Swat, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Cadet College Swat and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Cadet College Swat during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 14:35, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Ivan Mbakop

Hi Liz,

I'm Armaniari23, and I would like to request the undeletion of this draft deleted under CSD G13. Please restore the page so that I can make edits to it. User:Ymblanter advised I reach out to you since you deleted it. Thank you. Armaniari23 (talk) 18:48, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brahuistan

Hi Liz. You closed this AFD a few months ago. The nominator feels the conclusion was wrong. They don't seem to be experienced enough to have brought it up with you, but have ended up posting at WP:AN instead. I've taken a quick look, and while it's not at all my area of expertise, I do have concerns. Not with your close per se, which was indeed a read of consensus at the discussion, but that the AFD discussion itself while well-intentioned was defective. Participants seem to have conflated sourcing of Brahui people and Brahui language with the term "Brahuistan", which may turn out to be an aspirational nationalistic construct absent from reliable sources. I may have it all backwards, but since the participants on both sides may well be passionate about the topic, but seem to not be very experienced at en:wiki, I thought I'd drop you a note. I made my own comment there at . Martinp (talk) 21:15, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

I'd like to add my voice in support, and may, if I have the time and the inclination, nominate the article for AfD myself. I don't think there was any problem with your close, but I think the discussion itself was defective. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:29, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

DRV notice

{{subst:DRV notice|PAGE_NAME}} ~~~~ Yousiphh (talk) 22:26, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Yousiphh,\

I gather you are trying to inform me about a discussion at Deletion review but you just left the template. It would help if you linked to the discussion itself or at least told me what article the discussion is about. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:41, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Liz. I'd like to request for Israfil Bek Jedigar to be restored. I have given reasons why separately here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_410#Israfil Bek Jedigar. Thanks in advance! Yousiphh (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Covid-19 pandemic

Are you going to take it off the talk page? It seems outdated now since the pandemic is practically over Astrawiki3203 (talk) 17:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Astrawiki3203,

I'll probably remove it in the near future, it's been almost 5 years now and while people are still dying from COVID-19, it isn't so much in the news these days. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for kind comments

Thanks for your kind comments about @MPF and I cleaning up after Treeenthusiast during the incident discussion. I'll also mention @Plantdrew, @Tom Radulovich, and @Joseywales1961 much more frequent new plant article cleaners than myself. They are heroes. I tend to mostly fix edits to existing articles since I've got a large number of them on my watchlist and will often check to see what else the editor has been working on, just in case. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 17:48, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Indeed! Thanks! - MPF (talk) 19:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, MtBotany and MPF,

Well, thanks to all of you! Wikipedia is enhanced by editors who spend time improving the content work of less experienced editors without complaining. I'm sure that there are even more anonymous editors working in the trenches, fixing typos or incorrect references without acknowledgement. My only comment is if you come across editors who repeatedly make the same errors that take work by others to "fix", it can help to spend the time to teach them how to become a better editor (if they are well-intentioned) or alert an admin (if they seem to be making mistakes on purpose). Many thanks to you both! Have a great weekend. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Notification: Deletion review for Dojo (film)

Hello Liz, I have submitted a deletion review request regarding your closure of the AfD for Dojo (film). The request is now listed at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thank you. ~~~~ CinemaArchivist (talk) 04:54, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CinemaArchivist,

Thanks for letting me know. Don't forget to post a notification on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dojo (film). Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:01, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Notification: Deletion review for Jon Paul

Hello Liz, I have submitted a deletion review request regarding your closure of the AfD for Jon Paul. The request is now listed at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thank you. ~~~~ CinemaArchivist (talk) 04:59, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CinemaArchivist,

Thank you for letting me know. Do not forget to post a notice at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Paul. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:02, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Request undeletion of article "List of MyNetworkTV affiliates"

You could've given a chance for splitting the List of MyNetworkTV affiliates page to both the pages List of Fox television affiliates (table) and List of Fox television affiliates (by U.S. state), rather than deleting the article entirely. Besides, MyNetworkTV still has potential to gain the audience it deserves, as it reaches much of the US by over-the-air affiliates by 89%. Even though it failed as a traditional network to compete against The CW in its early years, it has been successful when it converted to a syndication service in its later years by relying on acquired programming similarly to The CW Plus, although in recent years Fox Television Stations has been quite lazy to provide new content for the service except for the recent acquisition of Suits, which entered broadcast syndication in 2024. 2600:6C50:57F:BA33:A4AB:47D2:FAD:DB0 (talk) 11:09, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hi,

My draft for the Norwegian Film Commission page was deleted. Could you please explain why the Wikipedia page I edited was not approved and what I can do different? :) Andrine R (talk) 13:56, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Help regarding a page

Hey Liz, I hope you are well. I saw that you had deleted the page for Neil Cannon. I initially created the page and submitted it for review where it was rejected, however by a fellow admin I was given another chance and as of now, i was editing it and since im new to Wikipedia, I was moving it to review and it accidentally went to main space, i took it back out asap but i guess it was too late and you deleted it.

I understand your reasoning and would highly request if you could reverse it, I have been working on that article for over three weeks now, and a mistake caused it to be deleted. I truly respect your work into ensuring you are complying with the guidlines, but I would love it even more if you could help me in this.

THanks Liz! I saw your picture and you resemble my late grandma! Truly emotional

Jason Quinnn (talk) 00:00, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 18

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on September 13. Please help translate.

---

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Let's Talk continues

• CEE Meeting: Wikimedia CEE Meeting 2025 will be held in Thessaloniki, Greece, September 26-28.
• Learning Clinic: The next Let's Connect Learning Clinic will talk about "Mastering the Capacity Exchange (CapX) Tool" and will take place on September 30 at 13:00 UTC.
• Big Fat Brussels Meeting: The tenth in-person gathering of Wikimedians enthusiastic in free knowledge advocacy, Big Fat Brussels Meeting, will take place on October 3-4.
• Wikimedia Research Showcase: "Celebrating 13 Years: Wikidata’s Role in Learning and Culture" will be the featured theme for the next research showcase taking place on October 15 at 16:30 UTC.

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

• Tech News: Read updates from Tech News week 38 and 39.
• Wikifunctions: Wikifunctions is now available on 123 Wiktionary languages and have more than 3,000 functions available.
• Collaborative Contributions: A new feature, called Collaborative Contributions, allows editors to see the impact of their collaborative editing activities. It was live demoed earlier and you can follow instructions to test it out.
• CampaignEvents extension: The CampaignEvents extension was deployed to Wikimedia Commons and all Wikisources -80+ wikis.
• Event registration: Starting the week of October 6, on small and medium wikis that have the CampaignEvents extension enabled, all autoconfirmed users will be able to use Event Registration as an organizer. No changes will be made for large wikis unless requested in Phabricator. More information on Meta.
• Search Suggestions: Upon clicking an empty search bar, logged-out users now see suggestions of articles for further reading on all Wikipedias, in order to make it easier for users to find articles.
• Datacenter server switchover: A successful datacenter server switchover backup test took place on September 24.
• Activity Tab now on Android: Beta users of the Wikipedia Android app can now try the redesigned Activity tab, which replaces the Edits tab. The new tab offers personalized insights into reading, editing, and donation activity, while simplifying navigation and making app use more engaging.

Annual Goals Progress on Volunteer Support
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog · WikiLearn News · list of movement events

• Banners & Logos policies: The Wikimedia Foundation has published draft proposals for policies related to the use of banners and logo changes for advocacy purposes.
• Wikipedia 25: Wikimedia Foundation is creating playful, celebratory interventions on the Wikipedia portal page, the Wikipedia app, and potentially any interested Wikipedias to celebrate Wikipedia’s 25th birthday. Please share your inputs and add your username on the Talk page if you think your community would be interested in participating.
• Regional Funds: Welcoming new ESEAP Regional Funds Committee Members.
• Peer Learning: Reflections from Let’s Connect at Wikimania Nairobi 2025.

Annual Goals Progress on Effectiveness
See also: Progress on the annual plan

• Enterprise: Structured Contents now supports Wikipedia tables as structured JSON.

Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter

• Wikimedia Georgia: Wikimedia Georgia becomes the newest Wikimedia Chapter.

Foundation statements

• Knowledge integrity: The Wikimedia Foundation launches a new series that explores how Wikipedia can inspire new standards of knowledge integrity for our times.

Highlights from other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library · Milestones · Wikidata · Central and Eastern Europe · other newsletters

• National award: Wikipedian and current chair of Wikimedia Deutschland, Alice Wiegand, receives the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany for her voluntary commitment to Wikipedia and the global Wikimedia movement.
• Supporting admins and patrollers: Motivating, training and networking – Wikimedia Ukraine’s plan to support Wikipedia admins and patrollers.
• Wikimania roundup: A roundup of Wikimania and this year's Wikimedians of the year by the French-speaking community's newsletter, Regards sur l’actualité du mouvement Wikimédia (Views on Wikimedia movement's events, or RAW).

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!

MediaWiki message delivery 16:26, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Dave's garage image

You switched the image of the dave plummer page to Davepl.jpg even though there were concerns in the talk page about copyright 54rt678 (talk | contribs) 19:44, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, 54rt678,

Okay, thanks for letting me know. You can revert my edit if you wish. I'll check on it later. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:51, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Can you join me in reporting the picture for copyright because first of all the image date of the image being taken is incorrect and second of all it is the YouTube icon and third of all the uploader marks it as own work even though it is literally the YouTube icon of Dave’s 's Garage and Dave plumber would not use a random person's photo for a YouTube background 54rt678 (talk | contribs) 19:53, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

I did the deletion request: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Davepl.jpg 54rt678 (talk | contribs) 21:29, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ScottishFinnishRadish,

I just wanted you to know that I saw your messages. Please give me a day or two to respond to them. Thank you for this accommodation. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:28, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Liz, I know SFR didn't expect an instantaneous response but we haven't heard from you yet and you've made something like 700 edits since you said you'd seen the message. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:24, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, HJ Mitchell|,

Well, I'll get back to you today. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:10, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Outing

Just as a clarification for this, I did not go looking for outing the person but the username itself was a very coded reference to such extreme views. I will try and continue this with ARBCOM. Gotitbro (talk) 21:03, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 October 2025

Removing links on templates

Hello: Why don't you just remove the links pointing to the article rather than removing the square brackets? Logoshimpo (talk) 06:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Nevermind. I figured out the answer. Logoshimpo (talk) 06:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Drafts restoration

Hi @Liz:,

I would like to request the restoration of the drafts Draft:Hormusji N. Cama and Draft:Avtar Group, which you have recently deleted. These were on my to do list for some time, but I could not attend to them earlier. I will look into it once restored. Thanks. Elton-Rodrigues (talk) 06:59, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

"Deprodding temporarily"

I probably broke every single rule in the book, but I "temporarily deprodded" over a dozen BLP articles that have sources in other languages. Also, in several cases, the appropriate WikiProject was not notified. I did this to hold off the flood of recent proposals for deletion, like the little Dutch boy sticking his finger in the cracked dam. I'm happy to roll back my own edits in a week or two. Anyway, here's the list, curated in alphabetical order:

• Boualem Bouferma
• Serge Delmas
• Emmanuel Desgeorges
• Matthias Koch
• Pavel Kolev
• Manolis Kragiopoulos
• Lê Thị Hà Thu
• Pavlos Logaras
• Moshe Lugasi
• Lachezar Mladenov
• Toufik Mouyet
• Yousef Al-Nehmi
• Samuel Ojong
• Listner Pierre-Louis
• Matej Rojc
• Víctor Rosso
• Petar Stoyanov (footballer)
• Bazjon Tragaj
• Lukáš Urminský
• Maor Zohar.

Bearian (talk) 10:20, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Lord Mountbutter reverted one and I reverted two. I'll continue through the next few days, three per day. Bearian (talk) 19:34, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

"I don't understand the reason for reversing my edit. The guideline is very clear. "...To be canceled, this process (when correctly initiated) requires the presence of at least one reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the biography. Do not remove the prod blp/dated until the biography has at least one such source...."

Add a source and then reverse it. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I tried to explain that these were the extraordinary circumstances. Bearian (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

The guideline does not recognize extraordinary circumstances. Please stop, to discuss it. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I did discuss it with Liz and another user, but the discussion got broken up. Bearian (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

If you want to stop the flood of prod. deletions, take two minutes of your time, add a source, and remove the tag. What you are doing is against the guideline. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:50, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Let us wait for Liz to take her place. Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:51, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are expecting from me. I'm not the judge and jury. All I did was request an editor not tag 100+ articles in one day for deletion. I also suggested that I thought it was possible to untag a BLPPROD and then retag it later if it still needed a reliable source in order not to overwhelm our PROD reviewers and admins. This suggestion was only so that we could have a moderate flow of tagged articles, say 10-20/day rather than 100+/day. It was a temporary adaptation, not a permanent de-tagging. But again, it was a "suggestion", not an order. So many days have passed since there was this discussion that I think all of the original articles could be retagged at this point.

And I'm sorry for any delay in responding but I have been unwell and my life is kind of crashing down all around me these days. But if you want, for some reason, to escalate this attempt on my part to have a reasonable pace in deletion tagging for articles so our editors are not overwhelmed, I can't stop you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:05, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I've added at least one source to five of these, and re-prodded three, in addition to the one reverted already, for a total of nine. I must emphasize that none of the projects were appropriately notified, which is not required but is best practice. I'll finish the rest in the next few days. Bearian (talk) 22:05, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I've re-prodded two more. Bearian (talk) 18:38, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

I added a source to Serge Delmas. Bearian (talk) 18:39, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

O.k. Thnak you for your answer! Lord Mountbutter (talk) 19:08, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Congleton Town Council

You deleted this article on 13 September as "G8: Redirect to a deleted or non-existent page". From User:Crouch, Swale/Parish councils#X Town council this was an article so how did it end up being deleted as a redirect to a deleted or non-existent page when it was an article? It should maybe be merged to Congleton#Governance but I don't understand how it ended up being deleted under G8. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Crouch, Swale,

An editor changed the article into a redirect. This happens every day on this project or at least I run into this often here. For some editors, turning articles into redirects is their primary editing activity. And then the redirect target article was later deleted. But since you pointed this out to me, I have reverted the deletion and reverted the edit that "BLAR'd" the article. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'm glad we could undo it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Thankyou, could you please also undelete File:Seal of the Council of Congleton.png as well as that was deleted as orphaned, thanks. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Crouch, Swale,

 Done. I think that the file still needs to be added to the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, done, that's what Special:Diff/1314896606 refers to. Given the council article had existed for nearly 10 years before being redirected 4 and a bit days ago I think G8 was inappropriate, just restoring the article would have been better. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Well, in this case, it was a sock "BLARring" articles but we also have legitimate editors whose primary actitivity seems to be changing articles to Redirects. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:55, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello Liz, I need some help

Hi, How are you?

I started a Wikiversity page for our paper, “Securing and Enhancing Web Browser Security through Cookie Encryption.” It was deleted as a possible copyvio because an earlier version exists off-wiki. Since then I’ve done everything I know to do: I added an on-wiki authorship + CC BY-SA 4.0 statement, linked the Zenodo DOI and the preprint, and I’m ready to format it as a proper Wikiversity Paper. I’m also happy to replace any figures and follow whatever checklist you recommend. I’m not trying to bend rules—just learn and do it right.

Would you mind taking a quick look and telling me the next, correct step? If I should file an undeletion request, or go via Request custodian action, I’ll do that immediately. And if you think a fresh, teaching-oriented rewrite (single-column HTML, learning objectives, glossary, exercises) is the right path instead of a verbatim import, I’ll start that today.

I’m anxious about messing this up, and I’d be grateful if you could stand by me and make sure I’m following the community’s way of doing things. Your word will mean a lot, and I’ll follow it to the letter.

Links for context:

• My user page: [[User:Tomlovesfar]]

• Colloquium thread: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium#Publishing_text_from_ResearchGate_in_Wikiversity_as_a_copy

• DOI (Zenodo): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15287972

• Preprint: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391195563_Securing_and_Enhancing_Web_Browser_Security_through_Cookie_Encryption

Thank you for reading this and for any help you can give. I really appreciate it. ‍‍ TomLovesFar ‍💬 06:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Matmo

Hi Liz. I noticed that you've deleted Draft talk:Deleted---. It's in fact, before MAS0802 moved them all around, the talk page of what you have moved under Draft:Matmo. Would you please restore it under the correct title, i.e. Draft talk:Matmo. Thanks. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 06:40, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello again. I have taken the liberty and IAR to restore the content of the talk page. Very much grateful of you could restore its edit history. Many many thanks. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 07:28, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Liz. Would you help restore the edit history of the talk page (which Mas0802 has moved further to Draft talk:Tropical Storm Matmo 2025), or would you recommend going to RFU/DRV instead? 203.145.95.215 (talk) 17:45, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

I"ll look into this tomorrow morning. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, Liz. 203.145.95.215 (talk) 20:40, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Reversion of G8 deletes

Hi Liz, your deletions of Trial for the 2022–2023 coup plot in Brazil and AP 2668 needed restoring not deleting per WP:G8 "Redirects that were broken as a result of a page move". I believe you should of checked incoming links before hitting the delete button, as this would have indicated something wasn't quite right. I know you work fast in the deletion world and I appreciate that, but please double check things future. I have now restored the links and re-synced talk pages. Regards, CNC (talk) 10:42, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CNC,

I agree. Editors should also be more careful moving long-standing articles to different page titles just to make small changes in the page title and they should always, always leave a redirect behind. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:01, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely, there are no excuses for that imo. I did also notify ArionStar via diff when fixing that was fortunately acknowledged. For context the reason for not leaving them a talk page message as well is that they are not a mop-wielder who I believe should be held to a higher standard, as effectively the last line of defence in this case, even though they also should of known a lot better. If the move was done by a page mover for example, I wouldn't of left it at that either. That might sound harsh, but with great power comes great responsibility as they say. CNC (talk) 11:28, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Note

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mighty_Young_Joe%E2%80%93Goalorious_Mothers_SC#

take a look regarding unsourced edits please 93.140.197.21 (talk) 17:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Trial of Augusto Heleno

Hello Liz. Can you restore the page "Trial of Augusto Heleno" since the target has been recreated. BodhiHarp 02:54, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, BodhiHarp,

 Done If that article was moved back to its original page title, there are probably more redirects that could be restored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:59, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Move warring issue

Hi Liz.

After the closure of this discussion and discussing with Fram and on this AN thread, I draftified the alphabetical lists. Habst has now moved them back to mainspace, against a warning from Vanamonde93. As was also pointed out, the issue Habst raised was not a reason to bring the articles back to mainspace. I tried move-protecting to stop the move-warring but they just carried on and doing it for all 96 of the articles in question just takes too much time. I don't feel they're leaving any other option but blocking, but I'd like your input. FOARP (talk) 18:25, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

• What you said was not a reason to bring the articles back to mainspace actually was shown by Habst to be a valid reason to return them. He asked for one single day to sort things out and said that then they could be draftified. What is wrong with respecting that request? Why is it appropriate for you, as the main editor in the content dispute, to be fully-protecting the pages yourself and threatening to block him, given that you're participating in 'move-warring' as well? BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:32, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Well, it's over now, and a project involving the list is about to be presented at the NYC Wikipedia hackathon. There are participants in that RfC here IRL. The redirects are important; I responded to Vanamonde93's concern about it. I agree with the consensus established and will draftify the articles. Please, give us until the end of the day which I think is a reasonable request. --Habst (talk) 18:44, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

OK chaps. Will see what you’ve done tomorrow. I really wouldn’t repeat this TBH. Move-warring like that, with multiple admins (not just me) telling you to stop, was a very bad idea. FOARP (talk) 20:43, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

OK, I won't. Will you agree to never post derisively about other good faith editors behind their back as in User talk:JoelleJay/Archive 5#Our mutual friend about this subject, and that this is not OK behavior for an admin? --Habst (talk) 20:56, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

No need to plaintext your signature

Hi Liz, I see you voting on the current Arb Case as I write. You don't need to plain text your signature btw, us other Arbs with fancy signatures use them there too. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:54, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CaptainEek.

So, I can just leave my regular signature? Everyone else's signatures were very plain so I removed all of the code from my signature. Thank you for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:55, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

I mean, me, Worm, and HJ all have fancy signatures so yeah it's totally chill. Everyone else just has the bog standard signature as default anyway. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:59, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Technical question on deletion

I came across a new user who posted a promotional biography both on his user page and his user talk page. (Doctor posting "Why choose Dr..? office hours, contact info, etc.) Easy to {{db-G11}} the user page. However, on the user talk page, there were message from other editors after the initial "CV" posting, and updates to the "CV" after, followed by more messages. Is there a way to speedy delete nominate a section & then ≥delete only the promotional section? — ERcheck (talk) 22:40, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ERcheck,

If there is unsuitable content, I think you can remove it. I've done that before with User pages rather than deleting them. We run into this a lot because many new editors think their User page is for a personal profile. I accept more personal content than many editors/admins do but I draw the line at links to social media accounts. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:58, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Revdel request

Can you look at This edit to Ugly, and possibly also remove the edit summary from public view? Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 01:53, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, CyberTheTiger,

 Done This is borderline for what revision deletion was meant to cover but I think you could consider it "disruptive content". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:31, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Review deleted page

I noticed deleted page Seido juku (G8 (redirect): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tadashi Nakamura (martial artist)

closed as soft delete (XFDcloser)

Is it possible to find out why Seido Juku (also known as Seido Karate) and Tadashi Nakamura were deleted and see the page for review to be put back? As both are legit and still exist. 2600:4041:7948:9A00:F091:8076:151B:AA19 (talk) 01:59, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Existence and/or legitimacy are not grounds for an article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 02:04, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

The page did exist and was deleted. What is needed to get it back? 2600:4041:7948:9A00:F091:8076:151B:AA19 (talk) 02:16, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, 2600:4041:7948:9A00:F091:8076:151B:AA19,

It helps to provide a direct link to the article you are talking about. Are you referring to Tadashi Nakamura (martial artist)? Are you asking for its restoration? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:29, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Although it is easier to confirm if I could see the page. But nothing comes up when clicking on it 2600:4041:7948:9A00:F091:8076:151B:AA19 (talk) 02:32, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

what is needed to restore the page for Tadashi Nakamura and Seido Juku 2600:4041:7948:9A00:98F8:2B59:AB2F:929 (talk) 01:36, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

2600:4041:7948:9A00:98F8:2B59:AB2F:929, the AFD for Tadashi Nakamura (martial artist) was closed as a Soft deletion so I was able to restore it. I'm having more problems with the other one, we don't have a deleted page for Seido Juku and Seido Karate is a different page that was a redirect that was deleted in 2010. Can you be more precise and give me a link to this other deleted article? I can't review the reasons for deletion if I can't find the page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:45, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Does this help? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Seido_juku 2600:4041:7948:9A00:98F8:2B59:AB2F:929 (talk) 02:38, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Liz! Just wanted to see if I can find any other information to get the Seido Juku page mentioned above back up. Thank you! Seidokarate1976 (talk) 18:24, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

It looks like the page "Seido juku" was just a redirect to Tadashi Nakamura, and when the page Tadashi Nakamura was deleted, it was deleted alongside it. Katzrockso (talk) 08:21, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

AfD for Brad Hefton

Hi Liz, I was wondering what your basis was for closing the AfD on Brad Hefton as "no consensus" rather than "keep" was.

Thanks Katzrockso (talk) 18:10, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Katzrockso,

Can you provide me with a link to the article or AFD you are concerned with. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi Liz, I apologize for not including that in the first post, my apologies.

This is the discussion .

Thanks Katzrockso (talk) 05:22, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

The article still exists. What's the problem? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

I read the AfD and had a different understanding of the consensus. A keep AfD has a different standard of precedent than a 'no consensus AfD so I was just curious about the reasoning. There is no problem.

Thanks, Katzrockso (talk) 03:10, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

It also matters in this particular case, since I presume a No Consensus close would mean the article is still susceptible to speedy deletion due to the creator being a sockpuppet, whereas a Keep decision in an AfD supersedes that. And outside of one of the delete arguments bringing up the creator, the OP and the other delete vote specifically mentioned lack of sourcing, but then didn't address the large amount of sources found by 4meter4 and which was subsequently used as keep votes by 4 other editors. I don't understand how this is a No Consensus close either. Silverseren^C 03:18, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that really does matter in the long-run, because there are substantial edits by others: I believe the substantial body of the text was added by user CapitalPun (my count is 5147 bytes added), who is currently not banned or blocked. Additionally, user Hack added 1305 bytes of text to the article, also not a banned user. Consequently, I have a hard time understanding Pppery's rational for a speedy deletion. Katzrockso (talk) 04:53, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Regardless, Liz, could you explain your close rationale on that one? Because I don't really see how a No Consensus close makes sense from that discussion itself and you didn't give an explanation in your close statement. Silverseren^C 23:01, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey, Liz, I know about your page notice at the top and your talk page is often a lot in general, so I don't want to harass you in any manner. But I also don't want to just avoid a conversation at the same time, you know? Silverseren^C 22:05, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm in the middle of a task, User:Silver seren but I'll come back to respond to your message. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:08, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• Katzrockso, I saw three strong opinions for Deletion including the nominator and one of the Keep arguments could be discounted as the editor was a sockpuppet. And a number of the "Keeps" were on the order ofa "per X" argument which is not as strong as an editor presenting their own conclusions about what the outcome of a AFD discussion should be. "Per X" arguments, whether pro or con Keep/Delete, carry less weight for me than an original argument. I don't close that many AFD discussions as "No consensus" as editors who are either pro-Keep or pro-Delete are dissatisfied with a NC closure but in this case, I thought it was the only closure that honored both editors who thought the article should be Deleted and those who thought it should be Kept.

As for me, whether or not an article is Kept through an AFD Keep closure or a NC closure doesn't affect any future AFD closures that I perform. I've seen opinion swing widely on AFDs even within the same year so I look at each one with fresh eyes. I hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Restore G8 deleted redirects in project space

Hi Liz, I am so sorry for creating so much work for you lately between User talk:Habst#Speedy deletion nomination of List of Olympic competitors (Om–Oz) and this request, especially when it could have been avoided. I'm very thankful for your help.

Per Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Redirects to lists of Olympic competitors/Jesper Garnell, can you please restore this list of redirects you deleted under G8? I can remove the actual redirect part when they get created so they won't immediately be G8 deleted again. (The reason is that my understanding is at least some of them were BLARed articles with important page history about historic Olympians).

I originally tried to request this under REFUND as it was a technical deletion but was asked to ask you directly. --Habst (talk) 20:29, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Habst,

These were all broken redirects to Lists of Olympic competitors. Where would you have them redirected to if they were restored? They can't be redirected to Draft space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:12, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

I would just comment out the redirect part so they aren't redirects any more. The utility would be having the page history (and possibly Wikidata item links). Thanks, -- Habst (talk) 21:19, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

If we have to have a page to target, I guess it could be Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics/Redirects to lists of Olympic competitors. Habst (talk) 21:21, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

What's the problem with having subpages of a project page redirect to draftspace? jlwoodwa (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, jlwoodwa,

It's how I've interpreted Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects in the past. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:54, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Liz, sorry for the ping, was wondering if you could restore these pages if you have a moment? You can comment out the redirects (or I can) if it would be an issue. Thank you so much for your help with this. --Habst (talk) 00:41, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Alternatively, can you at least comment here that you give permission for a WP:REFUND administrator to restore the pages? I think that should be sufficient, because these pages were deleted as the result of a technical process and not by a deletion discussion. --Habst (talk) 00:39, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Liz, sorry for the ping on this again, confirming if you could restore the page history of these redirects or confirm that a REFUND administrator can do it? Thank you so much for your understanding and great work here. --Habst (talk) 13:26, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

if these have page history, then they probably shouldn't have been moved out of the mainspace, but kept as deleted pages there. That keeps the logs there (who created, why was it deleted) and makes it easier to undelete the history if they ever get recreated. Fram (talk) 13:59, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

That's not true; the logs will always be in mainspace regardless of whether they are moved to project space. --Habst (talk) 14:07, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

For e.g. Wikikreator, I can go to here and see at the bottom who created it and when. For Jesper Garnell, if I go to here that info is no longer there. Fram (talk) 15:20, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

That's unrelated – Garnell's article was created in 2010, before page creation was logged. jlwoodwa (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Agree with FRAM here: these should stay deleted. Redirects are not a save-function for deleted articles, that is what undelete is for. FOARP (talk) 15:48, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

I also agree with FRAM's rationale but it was based on a premise that turned out not to be true. These pages were only deleted as the result of a technical process; they weren't deleted by any discussion or consensus, so technically we don't even have to have the deleting admin's permission to REFUND. As an admin, can you undelete them then? --Habst (talk) 16:44, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Theclassicalmusicwriter

I need a gut check. I blocked the above editor for a week for personal attacks, in direct response to their sarcastic response to my post of yesterday. I'm not impressed with their behavior, and I think they've been given too many second chances, but I'll be honest; their tone, and their conduct at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JoAnna Cochenet, have gotten under my skin in a way that rarely happens. Am I out of line with the block? I'm not convinced I'm thinking straight any more. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:34, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Dromagh Castle draft page inquiry

Hi Liz,

We are part of a year 1 undergraduate course in Digital Technology at LIUC (Milan, Italy), and will as a supervised student team be working on a digital publishing project that involves creating a new article draft.

We noticed Dromagh Castle listed among the requested articles. After researching several sources, we planned to create a draft page for it. However, while preparing to create the draft, we noticed that a previous version had been deleted.

Our group would like to recreate the page with improved, well-sourced content that fully meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Could you please share the specific reason why the previous version was deleted? Knowing the original concerns will help us ensure our recreated draft adheres to all community standards and avoids repeating past issues.

Thank you very much for your time and guidance!

Best regards,

Group Members: User:DKJKEditor • User:LIUCNick17 • User:LIUCfede22 • User:LIUCna23 • User:LIUCryu7 • User:LIUCsophie03

DKJKEditor (talk) 13:25, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Request for undeletion in this specific case (the former draft was considered abandoned as it was not edited at all for a set amount of duration) is thataway. Not sure why Liz's summary thing was being repeated on G13 deletion but oh well AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:09, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).

Administrator changes

• Billinghurst
• Crisco 1492
• DarkFalls
• Spike Wilbury
• Valereee
• Ergo Sum

CheckUser changes

Vanamonde93

Arbitration

• After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g. [[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.

Speedy deletion

Hi Liz, I think you accidently deleted this article Víctor Rosso. It was BLPPROD, but I found multiple reliable sources that supported claims in the article and added them there, so it was no longer eligible for PROD deletion. I was also working on cutting down some of the material, which was exceptionally long for the subject.

Thanks, Katzrockso (talk) 10:46, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Katzrockso,

You are correct. About an hour before the article was due to be deleted, you added some references to it. I handle PRODs by having a day's worth open in tabs on my computer and I should have refreshed that tab before deleting the article but I didn't and that was my mistake. Just because last minute changes rarely happend with PROD'd article doesn't mean that they never happen and this was my oversight. Thank you for bringing this to my attention so I could fix my error. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:16, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

No worries Liz, I understand there is a lot going behind the scene!

Thanks for undeleting the page. Katzrockso (talk) 20:21, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Katzrockso,

Well that is very understanding of you. It's appreciated. Some editors who disagree with a deletion or admin decision come in, guns blazing, and I'm glad we could discuss the outcome here calmly. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:23, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Clarify AfD

Hi, could you kindly explain your judgment of consensus in this case in more detail? In my view, the majority of participants, or half if you don't include the nominator, supported either merge or delete. FaviFake (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, FaviFake,

I saw two editors arguing to Keep this article and one of the editors was arguing for a "Keep and Merge". I don't see this as a consensus to Merge in any way. I won't revert my closure as I think my closure was correct but I am willing to relist this discussion if this is an outcome you would prefer. In these situations, I allow another closer to handle any future closures of the discussion. Just as an aside, we are having these problems frequently in AFDs these days because we have so many fewer editors participating in discussions. The closure would be much more definitive if we had 6 or 7 participants weighing in with their arguments. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:21, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! If i recall correctly, the same (or another editor) editor voted to keep and merge somewhere else, but actually meant keep the content and merge it, thereby blanking and redicting the article (but I might be completely wrong!). Unfortunately they never replied to my comment. Thanks for your willingness to relist it.

@Reywas92 In this comment of yours, did you mean you wanted to keep the article or to merge it? Or you don't mind if either choice is made? FaviFake (talk) 14:45, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes a merge in some form is fine. Reywas92^Talk 14:56, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

@Reywas92 Thanks. While from your AfD comment it seemed, at least to me, that you were in favour of a merge, I'd like to understand if you meant to also vote for a keep as well, or if you only meant to vote for a merge. Did you meant to vote in favour of either one, or just merge or just keep? FaviFake (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Also noting that in the related discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest law firms by profits per partner, the relister Owen commented this, regarding Reywas92's similar "keep and merge" comment:

"Keep and merge" is the same as "Merge". We don't delete the history behind the resultant redirect. [...]

If anything, it seems there is a misunderstanding in the meaning of this !vote between related AfDs. FaviFake (talk) 15:39, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

I meant only merge, but without specifics of how to do so with the related articles. — Reywas92^Talk 15:49, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! FaviFake (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Please revert it

Hi Liz. Hope you're doing well. As per my user talk page, I tried to revert my relist action but I am struggling to do it here. Please help me out there. Thank You! Fade258 (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Fade258,

I was not aware of a discussion on your user talk page, is this situation resolved now or did you still need some action from me? I tend to respond to messages on my user talk page at the end of the day. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:48, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

@Liz, My initial question was to revert my AfD relist as I had struggled to revert, which is asked in my user talk page. Now, there's one votes after relist. I request you to look at that AfD and tell me whether my relist is appropriate or not. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 08:17, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Fade258,

If you are writing about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boo (Mario franchise), no I don't think a relist was inappropriate and it might even be relisted again, depending on who reviews it next. There are a collection of different opinions and as a Non-admin closer, in my 5 years of AFD experience, you couldn't have handled it any other way. What Zxcvbnm was asking from you was for you to interpret the arguments and this was a close call so that would have been inappropriate for a Non-admin closer to do. Although I understand the comments left on your User talk page, it is not unusual for remarks like this to come from editors who are seeking a quick closure in favor of their point-of-view. They might be right in their conclusions but what they were asking you to do would not have been appropriate according to our guidelines for Non-admin closers and you have nothing to apologize for.

These kind of complaints are not at all uncommon once you start closing or relisting AFD discussions. So, if you wish to continue to be involved in AFD administration as an Non-admin closer, I'd just advise you to stay away from close calls or any discussions that seem controversial. It is easy less fun to be called to come over to Wikipedia:Deletion review but with some divided discussions, you just know that whatever the outcome, there will be objections to your closure. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:05, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

There be whales here

In light of WP:ANI#UtherSRG, would you like to revert your re-addition of my removal of the CfD tag on Category:Humpback whale? SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, SarekOfVulcan,

I'm sorry for the delay in my response, I was not aware of the ANI discussion. But it looks like User:Pppery got to the category right-away. I was not taking sides in this dispute, I run a query throughout the day that searches for empty categories to tag and this one popped up. Looks like it is no longer empty so untagging it is appropriate. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:46, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Tout-fait

hi i'm just following up from a box that said to let you know i've created an article that hopefully doesn't have the same problems as the one you deleted! you can find it here Tout-Fait: The Marcel Duchamp Studies Online Journal. would love for you to review!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by An undesired fidelity (talk • contribs) 19:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, An undesired fidelity,

I just wanted to tell you that Tout-Fait: The Marcel Duchamp Studies Online Journal was deleted as a Proposed deletion (PROD), not through an AFD discussion, so you could have come to me or WP:REFUND and asked for deleted article to be restored although it was probably wise to start over from scratch to avoid any association with User:Socrynpinfeb, the former article creator who is now blocked. I hope you are not Socrynpinfeb, returning to edit as doing that could get you blocked as a sockpuppet.

I usually don't review articles being examined at AFD discussion until it comes time to close a discussion but since you made a request, I'll check it out. Together with the blocked editor, this was a bit of a controversy so I'd look over all of the associated discussions with Socrynpinfeb and this article so you can see where the reviewers are coming from when they come to participate in the deletion discussion. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:51, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Reviewing ANI

Hello, I'm contacting you since you are an active administrator and frequently on ANI. If you have time, would you mind reading this ANI report I filed and commenting on it? This looks like it's not gonna get any input before getting archived.

For the record, I'm not asking you to pick my side. I could be wrong. I want this to get noticed by uninvolved users because I find the case as a long-term disruption that must be dealt with. I already tried RfC/3O but nobody ever came down to resolve it. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 11:31, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Emiya Mulzomdao,

Well, first, the RFC you tried to set up was not done correctly. There is no shame here, RFC need to follow very strict guidelines and it's a challenge for many people to do so properly. I think you should try running an RFC again, go to the Teahouse for help. Once the RFC is correctly posted, it will be advertised on a number of other WIkipedia pages and noticeboards and so more editors will know about it and hopefully participate because it will get more publicity.

As for the ANI, it seems like a problem you have had is that talk page discussions are limited to just you two editors and you need to have more editors to join the discussion. The complaint posted at ANI can help with that but it is rather long and many editors won't take the time to sort out the problem if the complaint posted to the noticeboard is lengthy. It can help to post messages like you did here, on editor's user talk pages or on a relevant Wikiproject talk page (say for Korea or Women's issues) as long as the nessages are absolutely neutral so that they are not seen as canvassing. That means not encouraging editors to support your point-of-view and just inviting them to participate.

I just glanced over your ANI complaint as it required more time than I have at the moment but I'll return to it. If you are looking for advice, I'll just say, don't bludgeon the discussion which will discourage other editors from participating in it which means, don't feel like you have to respond to every comment made by the other editor. If a discussion looks like it is dominated by a back-and-forth between two editors, other editors will not want to join the discussion because they think it has gotten personal, rather than about Wikipedia policy. Leave space for other editors to participate and don't make the discussion any longer even if that means going a few days with no comments on the discussion. I'll post right now that I haven't analyzed the discussion, I have no point-of-view on one "side" being more correct than another and I have not been canvassed, just asked to look over the discussion, not take sides. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the situation. I think I did follow WP:RFCOPEN beat by beat, including publicizing the RfC on other Wikiprojects. But I look into it again.

I'll refrain from disrupting the discussion as you suggest. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 11:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

You've got mail

Liz, please read and respond ASAP. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:39, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Understood, ScottishFinnishRadish. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:59, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

October 2025

Hello, I'm ThatOneTechNerd. I noticed that you made a comment on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casey_Fiesler that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Harassment against another editor. ThatOneTechNerd (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

My apologies, this was sent to the wrong user. ThatOneTechNerd (talk) 07:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, ThatOneTechNerd,

I'm glad you said you were mistaken as the only edit I can see I made to Casey Fiesler was to remove an AFD tag in April 2024 which doesn't seem uncivil to me. I think you not only got the wrong editor, you got the wrong article because there hasn't been any activity on this article since June 2024. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:16, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

You are correct, have a great day! ThatOneTechNerd (talk) 20:19, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 19

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on September 26. Please help translate.

---

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Let's Talk continues

• Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Selection: Announcement of the final ballot for the 2025 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election and more answers about the decision. Eligible voters can vote between October 8 – October 23.
• Wikipedia 25: Are you planning to organize events to celebrate Wikipedia's 25th birthday? The Wikimedia Foundation offers grants to support active Wikimedia groups in organizing short-term, low-cost projects to celebrate this milestone. Applications are open until November 1.
• WikiConference North America 2025: WikiConference North America will take place from October 16–19 in New York City, USA.

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Product Safety and Integrity · Readers · Research · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

• Mobile Editing: Insights on mobile web editing on Wikipedia in 2025 are now available. This report highlights that ~95% of IP mobile users editing via wikitext open the editor but make no changes at all, a vast untapped potential. It also pinpoints where contributors most often drop off.
• Dark Mode: Dark Mode user interface will be rolled out on all Wikimedia sites on October 29. All anonymous users of Wikimedia sites will have the option to activate a color scheme that features light-colored text on a dark background. This is designed to provide a more comfortable reading experience, especially in low-light situations.
• Community wishlist extension: The new Community Wishlist extension has been released. This will allow users to add tags to their wishes to better categorise them, and (in a future iteration) to filter them by status, tags and focus areas. It will also be possible to support individual wishes again, as requested by the community in many instances.
• Paste Check: 22 Wikis are now testing a new Edit Check feature, Paste Check, to help avoid and fight copyright violations. When editors paste text into an article, Paste Check prompts them to confirm the origin and licensing of the content.
• Tone Check: The Wikimedia Foundation is working on a new check for newcomers: Tone check. Using a prediction model, this check will encourage editors to improve the tone of their edits.
• Search Suggestions: Search Suggestions was deployed on English Wikipedia. Upon clicking an empty search bar, logged-out users see suggestions of articles for further reading. The feature is available on both desktop and mobile.
• Unsupported Tools Working Group: A new Unsupported Tools Working Group has been formed to help prioritize and review requests for support of unmaintained extensions, gadgets, bots, and tools. The group has chosen Video2Commons as the first tool for its pilot cycle. The group will explore ways to improve and sustain the tool over the coming months.
• Tech News: Read updates from Tech News week 40 and 41 including about Sub-referencing – a new feature to re-use references with different details.
• Wikimedia Research Showcase: Don't miss the next Wikimedia Research Showcase, "Celebrating 13 Years: Wikidata's Role in Learning and Culture" taking place on October 15 at 16:30 UTC.

Annual Goals Progress on Volunteer Support
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog · WikiLearn News · list of movement events

• Wikimania: Wikimania Nairobi has been featured in more than 100 stories across community platforms and international media outlets.
• Wikifunctions: Rich text is now available for embedded Wikifunctions calls across the 150 wikis where it’s enabled.
• WikiLearn: New Wikipedia online courses you can join to strengthen your Wikimedia editing skills.
• Human Rights: Making sure AI serves people and knowledge stays human: Wikimedia Foundation publishes a Human Rights Impact Assessment on the interaction of AI and machine learning with Wikimedia projects.
• Don't blink: The latest developments from around the world about protecting the Wikimedia model, its people and its values.
• Digital Safety & Privacy: Frequently Asked Questions about Wikimedia Foundation's Legal Work.
• Transparency Report: Wikimedia Foundation publishes its Latest Transparency Report.
• Privacy Policy: The Wikimedia Foundation Privacy Policy is getting a minor update in preparation for Temporary Accounts.
• Learning Clinic: Join the next Let's Connect Learning Clinic on the topic of "Mastering the Capacity Exchange (CapX) Tool (Part 2)" taking place on October 20 at 17:00 UTC.

Foundation statements

• Knowledge integrity: Lessons from Wikipedia on the 3 building blocks of trustworthy information. This is part of the new series from the Wikimedia Foundation that explores how Wikipedia can inspire new standards of knowledge integrity for our times.

Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library · Milestones · Wikidata · Central and Eastern Europe · other newsletters

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!

MediaWiki message delivery 14:50, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Admin URL Access Help

Hello! As a recently active admin, can I ask for your assistance? Would you mind setting impactmontreal.com/ to a dead domain on the IAbot? The team renamed themselves a few years ago and all pages from that domain redirect to a page deleted spot on their new website. EDIT: I forgot to mention that, since I'm not an admin, I can't set it myself. Elisfkc (talk) 18:06, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Asking someone else, since I think you just got offline. All good Elisfkc (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Elisfkc,

I'm glad you found someone else to help you out because I don't understand what you were asking me to do for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:10, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Reflection on my start on this site

I may have been a disruptive on this site initially (I made positive contributions as well before my first block), but I've grown from that now. I believe that I could have faced a better outcome if some things were different:

1. In response to Template:Inappropriate, I was told to read WP:NODISCLAIMER and WP:NOTCENSORED
2. When my uses of {{confused}} became disruptive, I was told to stop using that template altogether.
3. In response to my bad page creations, I was told to read relevant guidelines.

Also, my initial treatment for my first contributions related to things like Carnatic music was a bit harsh. I was clearly well-meaning. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) _{Tamil speakers: Contribute here} 01:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Odei Martin

@Liz:, Would you be able to draftify Odei Martin? I never realized that it was proposed for deletion until today when it exprired. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 09:55, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Das osmnezz,

 Done You can find it at Draft:Odei Martin. I'm sorry for the delay in replying, I sometimes take some time to get back to people and answer their questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

New article draft

Hi Liz! Where can I get the info box when I create an article for Wikipedia? Thanks in advance for your help!!! Thanks! (King of the Universe all (talk) 16:46, 17 October 2025 (UTC))

Hello, King of the Universe all,

I think you are likely to find editors who know more about templates than I do if you bring this question to the Teahouse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:38, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Strange Redirects

Can you check out the contributions for @Humanbeing9? Some of the redirects they have made are incredibly weird. I marked two for speedy deletion but I don't fully know if they are wrong. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 00:53, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

they are not wrong since they are names used by some Humanbeing9 (talk) 00:54, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler 2 redirecting to the Israeli President seems extremely NPOV. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 00:56, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, LuniZunie,

Another admin got to a lot of them and the redirect creator has been blocked. Thanks for the notice. If you find some that haven't been deleted that you think are inappropriate, please nominate them at WP:RFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:36, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

ThatOneVideoGamer

The redirect ThatOneVideoGamer was not R3. As is mentioned in The Completionist#Early life, it was the original name of his channel. Can you reverse the deletion please? Warudo (talk) 01:31, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Warudo,

 Done Thank you for informing me. I'm not familiar with this subject. This editor created way too many redirects to this article so you might find others deleted, either through CSD or RFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Battle of Kuvan-Darya

I noticed you relisted the bundled Battle of Kuvan-Darya nomination but I don't think you should have done that because they are not part of a series even though they were authored by the same person and the nominator did state his concerns. Logoshimpo (talk) 04:30, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Logoshimpo,

It helps if you provide a link to the article you are talking about. So, your concern is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Kuvan-Darya? Well, now that the discussion has been relisted, any closer can close the discussion at any time, it doesn't need to stay open another week. I relist discussions when it's not clear what the closure should be and that was the situation here. You are welcome to share your opinions in this discussion. I often avoid closing discussions that I have relisted to give another closer a chance to participate so I'm not sure when a closer will get to this AFD discussion. But I'm not going to revert this relisting. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Restore draft content

Hi, I was working on Draft:Mohamed Ishfan some time ago, but it was deleted after remaining unattended for over six months. Now that a new user has attempted to publish an article about the same actor, my content has been replaced with the new version, and I am unable to restore my draft since it is not available in the page history. Is there any way to recover the previous data that was stored in the draft space? ShappeAli (talk) 17:40, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

User:Louisvilleborn

You G8ed User:Louisvilleborn minutes after I moved a draft from there to User:Louisvilleborn/Marc Spiegel. Fat finger, or did I miss something there? Paradoctor (talk) 02:33, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Paradoctor,

I saw this page on a list of Broken redirects. But since you object, I'll restore it to you and you can take responsibility for it. My apologies. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:36, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm just trying to create my page and have it read my name at the top, not my user name 67.166.198.41 (talk) 02:43, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I'll assume you are Louisvilleborn, just not logged in. I will reply at User talk:Louisvilleborn. Paradoctor (talk) 02:53, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Broken? That shouldn't have happened. I'll check. Thanks for letting me know. Paradoctor (talk) 02:50, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Ok, it looks like Louisvilleborn tried to turn my soft redirect into a hard one and broke it in the process. Which I couldn't see as the page was already gone. C'est la vie! 🤷 Paradoctor (talk) 03:00, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

I've now fixed the 2x redir. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Category:Canadian people of West Asian descent has been nominated for merging

Category:Canadian people of West Asian descent has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Hassan697 (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 October 2025

Help - Accidental tagging!

Hello, i mistakenly flagged this page for AFD which is not the intended, is there a way to help remove the tags? Murali Chand Ginjupalli (educationist) BiomeScribe (talk) 20:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, BiomeScribe,

I don't understand, the article is tagged for an AFD discussion but then the AFD page is tagged for a CSD speedy deletion. Are they both correct? Did you mean to delete the AFD page? Can you just remove the AFD tag on the article and state in the edit summary that it was a mistake? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:12, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

A filter is denying that option saying i can't remove the AFD tag, that it has been dissallowed. So instead of running out of options, before the community start discussing on the page, i just marked the discussion page for CSD. See:

An automated filter has detected that you are attempting to remove an Articles for deletion or Miscellany for deletion notice from this page, so it has been disallowed. Please understand that removing it will not stop the discussion from taking place, and discussions should only be closed by experienced users. If you oppose the deletion, please comment at the respective page instead. If you did not remove any such notice, please report this error. BiomeScribe (talk) 20:20, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you immensely Liz! BiomeScribe (talk) 20:29, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, BiomeScribe,

This wasn't so complicated. Be more careful in the future. Also, I noticed that you didn't post a notification to the article creator, CHrt1, in the future, when nominating an article, category, template, redirect, etc., be sure to notify the page creator of the deletion discussion. This is done most easily by using Twinkle and checking off the box that says "Always notify page creator." Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and all corrections taken! Happy editing! BiomeScribe (talk) 20:37, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Growth News #35

A quarterly update from the Growth team on our work to improve the new editor experience.

New releases

English Wikipedia gets "Add a Link" Structured Task

We released the "Add a Link" Structured Task to 100% of accounts at English Wikipedia on Tuesday, September 2nd (before then it was available to 20% of accounts).

Growth features for Wikidata

After examining if the Growth features and Mentorship could be adapted to Wikidata, we activated the Growth features on Beta Wikidata to allow for testing and discussion (T400937). Although some features, like Suggested Edits, are Wikipedia-specific, the Growth team designed most features to be more wiki-agnostic.

Work in progress

Revise Tone Structured Task

The Growth team is making progress on the technical architecture, onboarding design, and early user testing. We are targeting an A/B test before the end of this year, with constructive edits by newcomers as the primary success metric.

Add a link to more wikis

The machine learning team has been working on a new model that can suggest links to more languages, including Urdu, Chinese, and Japanese Wikipedias. We are starting to release the “Add a Link” feature to Wikipedias that weren’t supported by the previous model.

Add a link, which can be configured by the community locally, increases the chance that a new contributor will make their first edit and then continue to participate in Wikipedia.

Research

The Growth team is involved in several research initiatives to help guide our future work:

Progression System – We have published initial findings from interviews with 10 English and French Wikipedia newcomers. The research examined motivations, challenges, and feedback on a prototype system intended to help editors build confidence, develop skills, and contribute more constructively over time.

Mobile Web Editing Research – This project combines quantitative and qualitative data, community feedback, and user journey analysis to identify possible ways to enhance the mobile editing experience.

Newcomers Survey – This project surveys successful newcomers on English Wikipedia to understand their early editing experiences, tool use, and community interactions.

Community events

The Growth team participated in several community events to listen, share, and collaborate on improving newcomer experiences across Wikimedia projects.

Wikimania - Organizers as key partners to support newcomers' growth in our movement

This session invited organizers to share how they introduce newcomers to Growth features and the challenges they encounter. The discussion focused on common newcomer questions and opportunities to strengthen collaboration in supporting new editors.

Wikimania - Lightning Talk: Structured Tasks

This talk demonstrated how Structured Tasks help newcomers take their first successful steps on Wikipedia. It shared impact data, community configurations, and a demo of “Add a Link,” illustrating how these tasks make editing more accessible and sustainable, particularly for mobile contributors.

Wikimania - Building a Sustainable Future for Wikimedia Contributors

With active editor numbers declining, the Contributors Strategy aims to create a clearer, more engaging path for participation. This session, led by the WMF Contributors group with involvement from the Editing, Growth, Moderator Tools, and Connection (formerly Campaigns) teams, highlighted efforts to streamline contributor experiences, offer structured and mobile-friendly workflows, and foster meaningful engagement. Participants learned about ongoing initiatives and shared feedback to help shape a more inclusive and sustainable future for Wikimedia contributors.

CEE Meeting - Retaining beginners and improving content moderation: an inclusive and sustainable future for Wikipedia contributors

Many communities face a decline in volunteer engagement. Newcomers often leave soon after joining, while experienced editors struggle to manage increasingly complex workflows and overwhelming backlogs. We presented the Contributors Strategy and the different features and workflows that can help communities to address these challenges. We listened to the specific needs of the CEE communities to help guide the Contributors teams' work.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

10:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Jan Zarzycki

@EALCCJJ @Piotrus @Ldm1954 @Russ Woodroofe Unfortunately, I don't know where the deleted page ended up, or where the discussion surrounding its deletion is. Could it be that my fellow editors don't respect the work of others? Gathering the details and considering the advisability of editing this article took some time, as it required consulting numerous sources and verifying their credibility.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Zarzycki (2nd nomination)

It is deleted but why? From the discussion it is obvious for me that C1 and C5 are confirmed!!! By decree of 18 October 2004, the President of the Republic of Poland awarded Dr. Hab. Eng. Jan Zarzycki the title of professor of technical sciences.^[1]

Perhaps distinguished professors face higher standards at some universities. However, a presidential appointment is not a political one, but a merit-based one. The president legitimizes a highly demanding procedure. Therefore, the very fact of being appointed a professor indicates that the individual has achieved exceptional competence and made a significant contribution to science.

I have read the following, but I am not qualified enough to launch an "appeal". I would be happy to add additional arguments, but I need time for that - editing articles for the wiki is an interesting, but still complementary activity in my calendar.

=>The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

KSz at OWPTM (talk) 16:58, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I was pinged, so will respond, although I am not Liz. The page was deleted because the consensus was that notability criteria were not met. You can appeal the close at WP:Deletion Review, but I think that there is little chance of success: the close is supposed to assess the arguments for delete and keep in light of Wikipedia policy. Liz is an experienced administrator with many AfD closes, and in particular I think that her close in this case correctly assessed the arguments. My best advice is to WP:DROPTHESTICK and give up on this article. You could file a deletion review, or make a draft and run it through WP:Articles for Creation, but I do not see either of these ending in success. Do not make a new article directly in main article space under any circumstances: that's likely to lead to salting of the article. You've pinged me 5 times in the last couple of days on this, and written large amounts of text: please carefully consider whether the essay WP:BLUDGEON has anything to say to you. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I think the article can be WP:USERFYied per the request the editor made at my talk page and their comments indicating that they find the DELREV procedure complex. Then they can try to learn Wikipedia rules by working on other content and gaining experience in determining what is notable and how to find reliable sources. Or they can give up, leave, or get banned by not dropping the stick. Sigh. But we should WP:AGF first. Let's userfy this, pass the ball to their court, and see what happens. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:05, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, KSz at OWPTM,

The reason why the article was deleted is all in the AFD that you linked to, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Zarzycki (2nd nomination). You may also look at the first AFD to, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Zarzycki, because that discussion can influence a later AFD. The first AFD was closed as Delete and in spite of that, was recreated so sometimes editors who participate in AFD discussions can be a little harsher to get their point across that this subject is not ready for their own article when there is so little time between AFD discussions (2 in one year!). If the article is immediately recreated a third time, you can expect the same outcome and, perhaps, for the page title to be "salted" to prevery any future recreations which is a very bad outcome if you eventually want to try another article for this subject in the future.

It's clear that you have a different opinion than the participants in this deletion discussion. I don't know if the bar is higher for academics depending on what institution they are affiliated with but, this is my own opinion, I think the bar is higher for professors than for other professions like politicians, athletes or actors. What happens with academics though is that it can be too early in their career to have a standalone article. As their career progresses, they can often be considered more eligible as they produce more well-known work or, for example, if they are currently an assistant professor and then become a full professor in a more important position.

Thanks to Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus for addressing this question as he is more well-informed about standards for higher education than I am. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:41, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Piotrus@Russ Woodroofe@Liz Thanks you for the clarification.

My resubmission of the article for consideration and publication was not due to a lack of understanding of the editors' arguments for its removal. I calmly supplemented the points that weren't considered clearly and emphasized what demonstrates Zarzycki's unique character. In Poland, the president awards approximately 20-40 professorships in technical sciences annually. This may be a lot compared to the 3-5 in mathematical sciences, but the scope of technical sciences is also much larger. Obtaining the title is linked to significant research results in the discipline and a role in educating faculty – promoted PhDs. However, there are only 3-5 universities in Poland with a faculty of electronics (depending on how you count them), so leading such a faculty as a dean is an unusual attribute for the nominee.

All these facts were incorrectly assessed by the editors, and the analysis was reduced to speculation about the number of published papers – which is unacceptable in my field. Quantity does not mean quality. Significant results are usually recognized years later. This year's Nobel Prize in Physics was for a result from 1988!

KSz at OWPTM (talk) 10:20, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

And when Zarzycki gets his Nobel Prize, rest assured, we will restore his article here immediately. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:39, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

I belive that wiki is not only for NPW.😀 37.30.42.105 (talk) 11:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello Piotr,

I have asked @Liz to "restore" deleted page of Jan Zarzycki "to my user space" for further development.

With best regards,

KSz at OWPTM (talk) KSz at OWPTM (talk) 12:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

@KSz at OWPTM I noticed and support your request. Good luck _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:28, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello Liz,

I would like to kindly ask whether the deleted article Jan Zarzycki (2nd nomination) could be restored to my user space for further improvement.

I fully respect the AfD outcome and understand the reasoning behind the deletion.

My goal is only to work on the text privately, learn Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing standards, and prepare a properly referenced version that can later go through Articles for Creation or Deletion Review.

I also plan to strengthen the article with independent and reliable sources — that is, publications or documents created by third parties not connected with the subject (for example, Monitor Polski, national bibliographic databases, or academic references citing his work).

It is also worth noting that in the field of technical sciences, the impact of a researcher’s work is sometimes difficult to document publicly, as many projects may be covered by confidentiality clauses, national security restrictions, or patent protection. This can limit the number of openly available secondary sources, even for distinguished scientists.

If possible, please restore it to:

→ User:KSz at OWPTM/soundbox/Jan_Zarzycki

The subject holds the title of Professor of Technical Sciences, awarded by the President of the Republic of Poland in 2004 (Monitor Polski No. 115-8-04), which satisfies at least C1 of WP:PROF.

Thank you for your time and understanding.

Best regards,

KSz at OWPTM (talk) 08:02, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Vega flight VV17

Remember that purge of Vega rocket launches back in 2023? Flight 17 seemed only the most notable as it was the second Vega rocket to end in failure, so I think it should have been kept. I restored it, but didn't notice your "restore page" in time. My apologies. Tigerdude9 (talk) 16:59, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Tigerdude9,

No need for apologies because I don't know what you are referring to. It really helps if you provide a link to the exact page where the article was or is. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

This Vega rocket launch failure. I felt that it was still notable because it was the second Vega rocket to end in failure. Tigerdude9 (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2025 (UTC) Tigerdude9 (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Want to edit during daytime only.

Can I request my account to be globally locked for a few days to prevent Wikipedia addiction or is just controlling it myself easier? DareshMohan (talk) 18:58, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Stewards do not do temporary wikibreak global locks. You might be interested in the WikiBreak enforcer script. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:36, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@Anomie: I am trying to use your script although I'm not sure how to. I've installed it. DareshMohan (talk) 22:11, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

@DareshMohan I suggest asking Bishonen who takes these kind of requests for en.wiki. Like jlwoodwa says, only stewards can globally block. S0091 (talk) 22:27, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

(ec)Hello, DareshMohan,

It looks like you are finding alternative methods to take a WikiBreak. There are some admins, like Bishonen, who are known for offering blocking services but as Jlwoodwa alluded to, only a steward could do a "global block", regular admins can only block editors from the projects where they are an admin. And I've never heard of a block only certain hours of the day or night. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

No worries, if the Script to lock out the account during certain times of the day. (see bottom link) doesn't work, I'll self enforce it. If self-enforcement doesn't work, I will ask for a admin-administered wikibreak for this week. Sorry for any time wasted. (If the lock out script doesn't let me log back in, I will ask an admin via email). DareshMohan (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Somhlolo National Stadium

Re , as I mentioned in the edit summary, the article does not mention anything about it being an athletics venue, athletics here meaning sport of athletics. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 10:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Kaffet i halsen,

The article states, the stadium is used for soccer and rugby matches, and athletics events. I assume all of these activities involve "athletics". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:54, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, thanks to @Greenman for recent additions. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 00:05, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Merging the MyNetworkTV affiliates page onto the Fox affiliates page

Since you decided to delete the list of MyNetworkTV affiliates article, I decided to add them back onto the List of Fox Broadcasting Company affiliates page. I clearly wanted the article to be kept and merged, but you feel like you wanted it deleted because its now impossible to maintain a list of television stations with specific call sign letters to remember, especially the low-powered Class A stations, which doesn't even have its own list to maintain like the full-powered stations. 2600:6C50:57F:BA33:845C:908E:8313:5499 (talk) 03:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, 2600:6C50:57F:BA33:845C:908E:8313:5499,

I can't look into this situation until you give me a link to the page of the article you are concerned with. Otherwise, it's impossible for me to know what you are talking about. You mention List of Fox Broadcasting Company affiliates but it doesn't looke like there are any problems with this article. If you provide more data and supply the questions you are interested in, I can look into the circumstances of the page deletion and be able to give you a fuller answer. But I look at hundreds of pages every day and you can't rely on my memory to know who you are and what you are referring to. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

If Fox actually provided some new acquired programming rather than being lazy to provide newer shows in recent years, then I'm sure that MyNetworkTV would get an audience it deserves, and that many stations with a full-time affiliation would have their own schedules of their to maintain rather than letting the service act as late night or overnight filler that sometimes shares secondary affiliations with multicast television networks carried on digital subchannels. 2600:6C50:57F:BA33:845C:908E:8313:5499 (talk) 04:25, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

This appears to be the return of the IP user that was supposed to be rangeblocked following an ANI discussion, but it didn't get properly applied. I've brought the matter back to ANI. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Noting here that I have just fixed the misapplied block to reflect the outcome of that discussion. Mfield (Oi!) 19:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

French word RfD close

I was surprised by the Delete close of the WP:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_October_18#French_word, but can you enhance your close summary? I will wait for your rationale. Jay 💬 06:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Jay,

I added a sentence to my closure but I'm sure it will not be satisfactory to you. I believe that the consensus among discussion participants was that this redirect should be deleted. It wasn't anything deeper than that. I'm not willing to change my outcome but if you would like this discussion to be reslisted, I'm willing to do that. I'm really not sure what you are looking for here as a "Keep" would have been a very unlikely outcome decision. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Right, the addition to the close statement does not help really. What I'm interested to know is how you concluded there is consensus to delete, and what did you think of the keep votes or opposition to delete. I want to rule out that my thinking could be biased. Maybe you are seeing something I am not. Jay 💬 06:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Well, the discussion has been relisted. All I can say is that while I don't go by a headcount, the fact that more editors were arguing for Deletion does make that option carry more weight in my mind. I would never judge whether or not you or any other editor is "biased" but I look at the strength of the arguments and part of that stength is in numbers. That's not the only factor but that is one factor is a part of how I determine consensus. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, and that is how closes should work. I was interested in your analysis of this particular RfD, but I guess I won't get that now that it is relisted. Jay 💬 08:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Veni Markovski

Hi Liz, I just wanted to let you know that I have reopened Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veni Markovski – an AfD you closed as soft delete – because the result was contested at WP:REFUND. So, I've restored the article and relisted the AFD. Best. —  Salvio ^giuliano 07:55, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Salvio,

That's fine. I appreciate you letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:48, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Aggro Crab AfD close

I am asking if you reconsider your closing on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aggro Crab (2nd nomination). The closing comment said "almost unanimous support for Keeping" but two of comments are "weak keep", so it feels more like little support for deletion in my view. I have a similar AfD nomination open, which I feel I would just withdraw if this AfD standard is applied. Regards IgelRM (talk) 20:12, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, IgelRM,

I said "almost unanimous" because there was the nominator of the AFD discussion which kept the consensus from being unanimous. But, honestly, how else could I have closed this discussion? If there were a few editors arguing for Deletion, I could have closed the discussion as No consensus but there were none. Generally, I'm pretty flexible about relisting a discussion I've closed but I really don't see a realistic alternative to Keep. What are you seeing that, in your eyes, I'm missing? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:15, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

I also argued against two of the keep arguments. So while I didn't comment a formal "Delete", unanimous makes me feel overlooked. From my view, the rebuttals including mine under the keep are sufficient to not just count by the bold prints. I had hoped for perhaps a final relist to address the recent comments. I agree that an alternative outcome is unlikely, but the closing comment is still relevant. IgelRM (talk) 15:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hello Liz! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Tabs on Top Menu, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:09, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

User:Liz this is Urgent. Please read!

I can't believe you brought an editor's hopes down for a good faith mistake they committed. Did you really have to scare them off with a block? Did you see the reply they gave you? Using your admin power to give block threats to editors can't be permitted unless in this situation was not needed! And in a lost world rising in population, with idle kids loitering around on the internet, we need high long hourly active anti vandal users like User:Criticize is. I appreciate other users handling the vandalism when they can, but still. You have been here for 12 years and should know better how to confront editors politely for making mistakes, especially when they do them for the first time. But the main reason im here is because you told Criticize their "editing makes no sense at all". Have you seen the contributions the user has done before the page moving mistake? What was it with you anyway!?

And while you're reading this, Can you please snap Criticize out of it and try to motivate him/her back to contribute again since I find their late response surprising.

Tbh, I find this user's anti vandal work much better compared to others. And lastly, just to be sure. Please don't question my account. I created this 2 years back so I can read articles better and use stuff like 'add to watchlist' etc. So this message should not look like im being suspicious. Thank you Xpad (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi @Xpad. Can I ask what your relationship is (or isn't) with Criticize? Also, are you friends with 41.210.147.208? Thank you :) --tony 16:23, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

User:TonySt, Nothing at all! I just noticed the user isn't contributing and i wonder why. It's great to see anti vandal users who are active all the time. I read alot of articles as one of my hobbies and have no interest to edit. Tbh, it's very annoying when I select an article to read and see slur language or find text that don't make any sense, mostly nonsense or texts without any single reference. It has been more of a problem for me lately. Xpad (talk) 22:20, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

(talk page gnome) @Xpad, I see I'm not the only who is wondering why almost all of your 19 edits are to Criticize's talk page, or to other editors' talk pages, trying to advocate for Criticize when she have not asked you to do so, and almost goading her to return to editing. If you really don't know Criticize, then this looks almost like harassment. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 07:49, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Liz, I would like to +1 this.

I had noticed Criticize has left editing for a little while, and after doing some digging I found out that, while it was for a few reasons, one of the main reasons for his extended leave was this message you sent. Criticize had been acting in good faith and has been a good-faith editor for a long time now, and I think the comment left was unprecedented. While I do not think your comment was at all fully to blame, I do find it concerning that such a good-faith editor took a break right after the message, and sourced it as one of the reasons why the break occurred.

Anyways, as always, happy editing =)

(I do agree that this user, Xpad, is incredibly suspicious) – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 03:59, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, LuniZunie,

I am always behind with reviewing messages on my user talk page and I didn't notice this one at all. I'll review this and see if I need to take any further action. Sorry for the delay. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:02, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

While I think the concern may still be valid, due to recent events regarding Criticize, I have decided to strike this comment. – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 19:00, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 20

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our last issue on October 11. Please help translate.

---

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Let's Talk continues

• Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection: Additional perspectives on current and future board selection processes.
• Global trends: We are seeing 8% declines in human page views on Wikipedia as some users don't directly visit Wikipedia to get information. Learn about this new user trend, how the Wikimedia Foundation anticipate these changes, and how you can help.
• WECUDI 2025: The second conference of Wikimedia, Education, and Digital Cultures will be held from October 29–31 in Mexico City, Mexico.
• GLAM Conference: Wiki GLAM Culture and Heritage Conference (WGCHC) will take place on 30 October – 1 November in Lisbon, Portugal.
• WikidataCon 2025: WikidataCon 2025 will take place online from October 31 – November 2.

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Product Safety and Integrity · Readers · Research · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

• Making it easier to say thanks: Users on most wikis will now have the ability to thank a comment directly from the talk page it appears on. Before this change, thanking could only be done by visiting the revision history of the talk page.
• Account security: Improvements to account security and two-factor authentication (2FA) features were enabled across all wikis. Another part of the project is making 2FA generally available to all users. Along with editors with advanced privileges, such as administrators and bureaucrats, 40% of editors now have access to 2FA. You can check if you have access at Special:AccountSecurity.
• Abstract Wikipedia: The naming contest for the new Wikimedia project, known until now as Abstract Wikipedia, is ongoing. Voting is now open until November 3.
• Tech News: Read updates from Tech News week 42 and 43 including the community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week.
• Wikimedia apps: The Wikipedia iOS App launched an A/B/C test of improvements to the Tabbed browsing feature into Beta for select regions & languages. Called “More dynamic tabs”, the experiment adds user-requested improvements and introduces article recommendations within the tabs overview, showing “Did you know” or “Because you read” content depending on how many tabs are open.
• CampaignEvents extension: Campaignevents extension will be deployed to all remaining wikis during the week of 17 November 2025. The extension currently includes three features: Event Registration, Collaboration List, and Invitation List. For this rollout, Invitation List will not be enabled on Wikifunctions and MediaWiki unless requested by those communities.
• Event registration tool: Autoconfirmed users on small and medium wikis with the extension can now use Event Registration without the Event Organizer right. This feature lets organizers enable registration, manage participants, and lets users register with one click instead of signing event pages.

Annual Goals Progress on Volunteer Support
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog · WikiLearn News · list of movement events

• Digital safety: Explore how you can help make Wikimedia safer by taking our new self-paced course, Safety for Young Wikimedians.
• Wikimedia Core Curriculum: The Wikimedia Foundation has developed seven online video learning modules covering the core English Wikipedia policies. You are invited to use, adapt, and translate the course.
• Advocacy: The Wikimedia Foundation has signed onto a statement that calls on governments and UN bodies to keep discussions about the future of internet governance accessible to non-government actors like industry and civil society. This statement is part of ongoing joint advocacy with affiliates to influence UN discussions about the future of internet governance such as the Global Digital Compact campaign and WSIS+20 deliberations.
• GLAM: The Wikimedia Foundation and several affiliates have signed onto the Open Heritage Statement, which supports galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAM institutions) to have the legal rights they need to collect, preserve, and provide access to cultural heritage.

Foundation statements

• How Wikipedia works: Wikimedia Foundation responds to questions about how Wikipedia works.

Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library · Milestones · Wikidata · Central and Eastern Europe · other newsletters

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcacwikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!

MediaWiki message delivery 16:08, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Request for Guidance: Brian Doubles Wikipedia Article - Previous G4 Deletion (2020)

Dear Administrator Liz,

I am Jennifer Highsmith, Vice President of Executive Communications at Synchrony Financial. I am writing to seek your guidance before attempting to create a Wikipedia article about our CEO, Brian Doubles.

Disclosure: I work for Synchrony and am transparently disclosing this conflict of interest upfront.

The Situation:

I understand you deleted a draft article about Mr. Doubles on November 29, 2020, after it was moved to draft space by editor MER-C in December 2019 for “covert advertising.” I want to do this correctly and avoid repeating those mistakes.

What Has Changed:

Since 2020, there has been significant independent media coverage of Mr. Doubles:

• Fast Company/Inc. Modern CEO (October 2025): https://www.fastcompany.com/91412611/this-ceo-is-bucking-rto-the-trend-and-embracing-remote-work
• Wall Street Journal (Oct 2025): https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/credit-card-consumers-charts-a4ce81e5?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqdwSNxzpaedMrLqmQXiPsZuLb0JCDwdCowBoxEoUJXAE4-8H-QM3Xm1&gaa_ts=6900f15f&gaa_sig=NounYj6IcfVcP4eiCv6pwvjxOC-gDnZJLoGwhl3MphQq2TxJbVpHdpx6bJ0Wf-vcUh6iH6nBi331ixbXpakVZA%3D%3D

• Wall Street Journal (April 2025): https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/banks-digital-lending-ai-credit-cards-bb031f3e

• Forbes (December 2021): https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenwalker/2021/12/16/ceo-brian-doubles-leads-16b-financial-services-company-synchrony-with-agility/

• NYSE ICE House (October 2024): https://tv.nyse.com/videos/synchrony-president-ceo-brian-doubles-on-a-decade-of-success-strong-culture

Note: Brian Doubles is already listed on the Synchrony Financial Wikipedia page as CEO in the “Key People” section.

My Questions:

1. Does the coverage I listed above meet Wikipedia’s notability standards for a standalone biographical article?

2. What were the specific concerns with the 2019 draft that I should avoid?

3. Should I submit through Articles for Creation (AfC), or would adding more detail to the existing Synchrony Financial page be more appropriate?

4. Given my COI, should I work with an independent Wikipedia editor instead?

I will not create or submit any content until I receive your guidance. If a standalone article isn’t appropriate, I completely understand and respect that decision. Thank you for your time and for maintaining Wikipedia’s standards.

Respectfully,

Jennifer Highsmith

Vice President of Executive Communications,

Synchrony Financial

Wikipedia Username: JHighsmithSYF‬! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Homepage&source=personaltoolslink&namespace=-1 JHighsmithSYF (talk) 16:36, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks — seeking content-focused guidance

Hi Liz, thanks for the note and the Teahouse invite. Understood about Wikipedia’s scope. My focus is editing Draft:Crisis Liquidity Ratio and ensuring it meets sourcing policies. I’ve added independent Bulgarian sources (journal, textbook with page numbers and appendix, proceedings) and a regulated issuer’s report. If you or another reviewer have a moment, I’d appreciate guidance on whether the current sourcing is sufficient for a short entry. Many thanks! Петър П. Петров (talk) 11:27, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Henry Stickmin Collection (2nd nomination)

Hello, Liz.

As soon as this AfD was closed as delete, the creator of the page reposted it as a draft, with the following edit summary: I won't ever get why all the sources mentioned were considered unreliable and the article got deleted. I feel that people are too strict, which isn't good per WP:BUREAUCRACY for example, even though there were explanations as to why the sources were unreliable throughout the discussion. How should this be approached? Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 11:44, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Basically, what I'm trying to ask is: was it appropriate draftification or editing against consensus? Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 16:37, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Update: The draft has been tagged with CSD G4. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 21:32, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Update 2: Draft was deleted. I do not believe I need to continue talking here. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribpas) 01:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Bertha McNamara

Damn! Thanks for catching that monumental f'up! Not sure how I did that - or how I missed it - real rookie mistake! Thanks again. KylieTastic (talk) 23:38, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, KylieTastic,

You were already an experienced veteran when I registered this account in 2013 so you are hardly a "rookie!" No problem with the article, I was just worried that I restored an article than you had merged elsewhere so we had two versions of the same content. I gather that's not true. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

OK "rookie admin" error. I think it was an issue with default keyboard actions on the special merge page, I just need to be mindful of that and just use the mouse (and double check end result). I've checked everything looks correct now, and all good. I was merging in old history from Bertha Bredt from 2007 into that article. Thanks again — KylieTastic (talk) 23:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Asking for clarity on removal of my prod

Hello Liz hope you are having a good day. I wanted to ask why a one word explanation mentioning notability is the issue not allowed? I ask because when two of my articles were prodded someone only gave WP:N as a reason and those who removed the prods didn't object to that so I thought this kind of reason was ok so I would appreciate some clarity on why it isn't allowed if that is ok. Thanks in advance if you respond. GothicGolem29 (GothicGolem29 Talk) 23:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, GothicGolem29,

First, different admins behave differently. Some do not ask many questions, others require all of the "t's" to be crossed and all of the "i's" to be dotted. I probably remove more PROD tags because of inadequate deletion rationales than other admins. I am very dissatisfied with our current PRODding standards. This is a situation where admins review PROD'd articles and files to ensure that the criteria for proposed deletion are met. PRODs are supposed to be "uncontroversial deletions" so sometimes PROD tags are removed if an admin think that the situation isn't uncontroversial. It's a judgment call.

I can't respond to the other PRODs you submitted that weren't questioned but please look over the list of this week's PROD'd articles at User:DreamRimmer bot II/ProdSummary. You'll see a wide variety of deletion rationales but I think that the editor doing the tagging should provide an actual policy-based reason, written in sentences that is more than one word. You just wrote "Notability" and I think you need to write more than that to explain what about our policies on notability in the tagged article calls for this article to be deleted. One word is insufficient. I think that is also true for "WP:N" but at least that rationale refers to a policy that the word "notability" doesn't. But ideally, I think a PROD's deletion rationale should be as comprehensive as that for an AFD nomination.

I advise you to nominate this article for an WP:AFD discussion if you want to see it deleted. But if my answer here isn't sufficient and you want to pursue this, you could file an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. I will not file a appeal at Deletion review as I understand your response in terms of different admins doing things differently(I do do

disagree on your Notability point slightly as me referencing Notability is referring to the policy on that just like them putting WP:N is but that is not enough for me to appeal given the rest.) And thanks for the advice on AFD I will consider if that is something I will pursue. GothicGolem29 (GothicGolem29 Talk) 16:34, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

List of minor planet discoverers

Thanks for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor planet discoverers. I have now moved the trimmed down version we've been working on on my user page to mainspace. Could you delete the redirects to List of minor planet discoverers to finish it? (Most of those redirects are now broken anyway; all of them can be removed.) Renerpho (talk) 00:45, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

If it helps, here's a list of the redirects that should go. I know it's a long list. I hope it doesn't cause too much trouble. Renerpho (talk) 01:20, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Renerpho,

I'd like to help you out here but there needs to be a deletion rationale. What is the basis for this deletion request? Is there a CSD criteria that applies to them? Perhaps you could take this to WP:RFD and get a consensus there. It's not that I think these pages should be preserved but I hope you understand that I can't delete these pages "because Renerpho asked me to". I wouldn't be an admin for very long after that! Think of it this way, it will be much easier to get approval before deletion than deal with the outrage that would occur if I just went ahead with this request. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

I had to temporarily remove the list you posted because the code that closed the collapse wasn't correct and everything I just wrote was inside the collapsed portion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:52, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

No problem with removing the list.

As for your question for a rationale, I'm a bit confused because -- at least as I see it -- deleting the redirects was part of the consensus reached in the AfD discussion, as part of the compromise to keep the article itself (first suggested by User:David Eppstein, whose proposal got a lot of support, and explicitly supported by other editors who commented on that, with no objections raised). Renerpho (talk) 03:04, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I'll look more carefully at the AFD but that sounds like an unusual arrangement to me. I've never seen that kind of situation. But you could be right. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes I feel like this was a bit of an unusual AFD. Thanks for taking a look again. Renerpho (talk) 06:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Talal Maddah albums

Please could you restore this and I'll AfD it, as it seems to warrant discussion? I thought I had removed the PROD but apparently not in time. Thanks, Ingratis (talk) 06:08, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Ingratis,

 Done No, you are correct, you did de-PROD this article but, in the future, please don't wait until the last minute to de-PROD a tagged article. This has now happened to me twice recently when editors untagged an article 10 minutes or less before it was due to be deleted. It's more likely for mistakes like this to happen. Plus, I can tell by your activity de-PRODding many articles that you review them on a daily (or almost daily) basis so just look at the day's PROD'd articles the day before they are due to be deleted. Sound good? Thank you for reviewing PROD'd articles, they don't get the attention of articles at AFDs do. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:17, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Liz. I take your point - sometimes I just forget, or get interrupted at the wrong time. I will try harder... All best, Ingratis (talk) 06:54, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, and short note regarding Zinfandel / Kratošija

Hello Liz,

I wanted to thank you for your neutral handling and professionalism during the previous redirect situation concerning Kratošija (it was on October 12 — I hope you remember). Although we haven’t been in direct contact before, I truly appreciated the balanced way you addressed the issue and your reminder about the importance of open discussion and consensus.

For a long time, it wasn’t entirely clear how to proceed, since the discussion at WP:ANI was closed and the matter was moved to Talk:Zinfandel.

I’m now preparing to post a structured proposal on Talk:Zinfandel, focused on improving verifiability and balance within the article — particularly regarding Kratošija (the Montenegrin grape variety genetically identical to Zinfandel / Primitivo / Tribidrag).

My aim is purely content-related and supported by reliable, peer-reviewed sources, fully in line with WP:NPOV and WP:V principles.

If you happen to have time, I’d really appreciate if you could keep an eye on the discussion there — your perspective would be very valuable and appreciated.

With sincere respect, — VitisArchivum (talk) 10:06, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Archaeological Survey of Israel

Hi Liz. Sorry, was there an "Archaeological Survey of Israel" page deleted? Could you please point me to the discussion, or anywhere where I could understand what happened? Thank you! Arminden (talk) 22:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Arminden,

I was deleting a lot of broken redirects that came from some article deletions. One deletion that created a lot of broken redirects was Roman roads in Judaea. If you look at the deletion log for Roman roads in Judaea, you can see that its deletion had to do with copyright issues and you can find out more information at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2025 October 23 for details. I don't deal with articles with copyright complaints but if you want more information on what are standards for deletion or of the process for handling copyright concerns, I'd go to MER-C who is a pro at deailing with these complaints. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Liz! Arminden (talk) 22:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, Liz. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

• When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
• All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
• A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
• As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
  • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
  • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

• Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
• Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.

Impact for administrators

• It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
• It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
• Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

• Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
• Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
• See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

• It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Enable the user info card
  • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
• Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
• Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
• The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

• How to use Special:IPContributions
• How automatic IP reveal works
• How to use IP Info
• How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

• For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Email regarding RevDel request

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

jcgoble3 (talk) 04:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

Mail Call

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

No rush, no answer needed. Star Mississippi 15:42, 31 October 2025 (UTC)